What are your thoughts about Richard's 1944/45 season?

[daver]

In terms of domination vs. his peers, it is one of the most dominating goalscoring seasons statistically in NHL history.

Some believe that his goal total (50), the gap between him and 2nd place (18 goals ahead of Cain), and the gap between him and the other top goalscorers is significantly inflated given the number of players that were missing from the NHL in 1944/45 due to the war. This brings into question how to value this season vs. other GOAT goalscoring seasons: Does he even get close to the same level of domination if no players left for the war, or does he even win the goalscoring title?

The counter argument to this is that perhaps his goal total was inflated but so were other goal totals so his domination over the other top goal scorers was legitimate backed up by the fact that he had a slightly less dominant season in 46/47 after the war had ended and players had returned and, even more significantly, in 50/51 when any remnants of the war affect were apparently gone and he just so happened to go toe to toe with Howe in his peak on the goalscoring front.

The other counter argument is that no other elite goalscorer who stayed in the league into 44/45 could muster anything close to the domination that Richard casting clear doubts that an elite goalscorer who left the league could have done any better than compete for 2nd place in 44/45 with Cain.

IMO, you could perhaps add an asterix (i.e. marginal context) to his level of domination that season but only to a degree that you may place it behind other GOAT goalscoring seasons that are on the same statistical level.

What do you think?

Click to read more...

 

[JackSlater]

Every season needs context to be considered, and the 1943 through 1945 seasons need more context than pretty much any other years in NHL history. By my count at least 85 NHLers who played at least 50% of a team's games left the NHL the previous year from 1942-1945, including 20 HHOFers and eight additional players who would make post season all star teams either before or after the 1944 and 1945 seasons. Five teams lost a starting goaltender, and another starting goaltender (Rayner) left after Brooklyn ceased to exist. Several top prospects didn't come into the NHL likely due to WW2 and some AHL players also left due to WW2. The period is a complete outlier in NHL history in terms of the percentage of NHLers who left the league.

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that Richard's season requires any kind of "asterix" or even an asterisk, but it seems very obvious that a person should consider what was going on in the NHL, or perhaps more appropriately outside of the NHL, when looking at the 1943-1945 period. It's also worth remembering that a player can only play in the league that is available to them, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't consider the quality of the league.

 

[67 others]

In terms of domination vs. his peers, it is one of the most dominating goalscoring seasons statistically in NHL history.

Some believe that his goal total (50), the gap between him and 2nd place (18 goals ahead of Cain), and the gap between him and the other top goalscorers is significantly inflated given the number of players that were missing from the NHL in 1944/45 due to the war. This brings into question how to value this season vs. other GOAT goalscoring seasons: Does even get close to the same level of domination if no players left for the war, or does he even win the goalscoring title?

The counter argument to this is that perhaps his goal total was inflated but so were other goal totals so his domination over the other top goal scorers was legitimate backed up by the fact that he had a slightly less dominant seasons in 46/47 after the war had ended and players had returned and, even more significantly, in 50/51 when any remnants of the war affect were apparently gone and he just so happened to go toe to toe with Howe in his peak on the goalscoring front.

The other counter argument is that no other elite goalscorer who stayed in the league into 44/45 could muster anything close to the domination that Richard casting clear doubts that an elite goalscorer who left the league could have done any better than compete for 2nd place in 44/45 with Cain.

IMO, you could perhaps add an asterix (i.e. marginal context) to his level of domination that season but only to a degree that you may place it behind other GOAT goalscoring seasons that are on the same statistical level.

What do you think?

Context definitely required.

in all honesty if you put Conor McDavid in the AHL and he scored 100 goals and 240 points, would you say he smashed gretzky's record and hold it up as much as an NHL season?

 

[ESH]

Context definitely required.

in all honesty if you put Conor McDavid in the AHL and he scored 100 goals and 240 points, would you say he smashed gretzky's record and hold it up as much as an NHL season?

Not really the same thing at all

 

[The Macho King]

Not really the same thing at all

Drop about ten other NHL players with him, and put most of them on his team (this would obviously require some finagling as Edmonton does not currently have 10 NHL-quality players).

 

[daver]

Every season needs context to be considered, and the 1943 through 1945 seasons need more context than pretty much any other years in NHL history. By my count at least 85 NHLers who played at least 50% of a team's games left the NHL the previous year from 1942-1945, including 20 HHOFers and eight additional players who would make post season all star teams either before or after the 1944 and 1945 seasons. Five teams lost a starting goaltender, and another starting goaltender (Rayner) left after Brooklyn ceased to exist. Several top prospects didn't come into the NHL likely due to WW2 and some AHL players also left due to WW2. The period is a complete outlier in NHL history in terms of the percentage of NHLers who left the league.

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that Richard's season requires any kind of "asterix" or even an asterisk, but it seems very obvious that a person should consider what was going on in the NHL, or perhaps more appropriately outside of the NHL, when looking at the 1943-1945 period. It's also worth remembering that a player can only play in the league that is available to them, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't consider the quality of the league.

So what is there to consider other than speculation that the league was significantly weaker which is not backed up by any statistical evidence? Why didn't any other goalscorer that can be objectively defined as elite as any of the goalscorers that weren't there dominate like Richard did?

You are refusing to acknowledge that there are meaningful arguments against your claim.

 

[The Macho King]

Can someone please present statistical evidence that WW2 happened to end this discussion?

 

[67 others]

So what is there to consider other than speculation that the league was significantly weaker which is not backed up by any statistical evidence? Why didn't any other goalscorer that can be objectively defined as elite as any of the goalscorers that weren't there dominate like Richard did?

You are refusing to acknowledge that there are meaningful arguments against your claim.

I am sure there are many arguments either way. nobody is saying he was not an outstanding player, top 10 all time.

I do recall a study once done on players who played around the "War years"

Doug Bentley had his career years in the late war years before missing 45 himself. So did his brother max

There were also players who had career ears but we ghosts or very average before and after the heavy depleted years. Bill Cowley, Herb Cain, Lorne Carr, Carl Liscombe, Billy Taylor, Lynn Patrick, Ab Demarco

A lot of players who were Point per game players in war years could not even stay in the league once all the other players were back.

So yes, an asterisk beside that year is not punishing Richard so much as it is being realistic.

 

[JackSlater]

So what is there to consider other than speculation that the league was significantly weaker which is not backed up by any statistical evidence? Why didn't any other goalscorer that can be objectively defined as elite as any of the goalscorers that weren't there dominate like Richard did?

You are refusing to acknowledge that there are meaningful arguments against your claim.

No meaningful argument against the obvious - that the league was significantly weaker in 1945 - has been presented yet. You seem to throw these words around but not actually understand what you're talking about. There is no statistic that in and of itself conveys that a massive number of players left the NHL due to WW2, other than actually counting the players who left. You're asking for statistics for things that are not measured in numbers and then calling for "objective" things that are inherently subjective like the definition of an elite goal scorer.

The other top goal scorers in that season didn't score as often most likely because they weren't as good at scoring goals as Richard was. It obviously helps that several top goal scorers were not in the NHL due to WW2. Montreal being the only team to keep its top line and being the only team to keep its top goaltender helps. Sweeney Schriner missing 24 games after scoring 22 goals in 26 games helps. A quick scan of the careers of the top scorers that year demonstrates that their scoring was inflated that year, but clearly none of them were as good as Richard was.

If you want to deny that the NHL was weaker during the 1943-1945 period just directly do it. I also hope that you get around to providing the meaningful argument against the obvious, because you have not made that argument yet.

 

[Michael Farkas]

This has become toxic at this point. Another thread where the OP objectively refuses to deny reality and other buzzwords...

 

[daver]

I think some people are misunderstanding the OP. Not looking for "context" to be that this season took place over 70 years ago.

 

[daver]

No meaningful argument against the obvious - that the league was significantly weaker in 1945 - has been presented yet.

That other elite offensive talents could not dominate like Richard did is a very meaningful argument that Richard dominates the 44/45 season under any circumstances.

Do you have any other examples of players exploiting a "weak" league or era to put up an outlier season (not that Richard's 44/45 is even an outlier to begin with in terms of his other peak seasons).

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

I dont see what the issue is. Richards 50 in 50 is clearly a product of a war weakened NHL. It still counts as a feather in his cap, but not as big as if he did it in a full strength season.

But at the same time he has more than enough other great seasons and playoffs to consider him an all time great.

 

[tony d]

Option 3. The guy was a great talent for sure, still given the war and the # of players out you have to wonder if his #'s got inflated because of that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I dont see what the issue is. Richards 50 in 50 is clearly a product of a war weakened NHL. It still counts as a feather in his cap, but not as big as if he did it in a full strength season.

But at the same time he has more than enough other great seasons and playoffs to consider him an all time great.

Exactly. Richard's 1944-45 isn't his most impressive season (that would be 46-47), and I'm honestly not sure if it's top 5 for him.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Exactly. Richard's 1944-45 isn't his nost impressive season (that would be 46-47), and I'm honestly not sure if it's top 5 for him.

do you consider richard's 1945 less impressive than other years because he performed at a lower level but it looks super good because of weak competition, or was he at peak performance but didn't get the chance to demonstrate just how good (due to the talent exodus)?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

do you consider richard's 1945 less impressive than other years because he performed at a lower level but it looks super good because of weak competition, or was he at peak performance but didn't get the chance to demonstrate just how good (due to the talent exodus)?

I think his 44-45 is demonstrably less impressive than his 46-47 - he outperformed the rest of the league by wider margins in 46-47. Despite competition being stronger in 46-47. Also, we should note that it was Richard's center, Elmer Lach, who won the Hart Trophy in 44-45.

 

[JackSlater]

That other elite offensive talents could not dominate like Richard did is a very meaningful argument that Richard dominates the 44/45 season under any circumstances.

Do you have any other examples of players exploiting a "weak" league or era to put up an outlier season (not that Richard's 44/45 is even an outlier to begin with in terms of his other peak seasons).

He very may well have dominated goal scoring that season under normal circumstances. I think that it is very likely that Richard would have led the league in goal scoring, but it is also very likely that he wouldn't have scored as many goals or led by the same margin. I don't think that any player exploited the very weak league. If you want to know which players had their scoring numbers inflated, take a look at basically every top scorer in 1944 and 1945. By no means is Richard the only player who had his totals inflated by the very weak NHL in which he played.

I'm asking again. Are you claiming that the NHL, which lost over 80 players and 20 HHOFers and most of the top scorers in the years surrounding 1943-1945, was not weak during the 1943-1945 seasons?

 

[67 others]

That other elite offensive talents could not dominate like Richard did is a very meaningful argument that Richard dominates the 44/45 season under any circumstances.

Do you have any other examples of players exploiting a "weak" league or era to put up an outlier season (not that Richard's 44/45 is even an outlier to begin with in terms of his other peak seasons).

In goal scoring? nobody is denying he is one of the greatest goal scorers of all time. A lot of players had career years during those years. Richard's 73 points was amazing. So was Doug bentley's 73 points in 1943 and 77 points in 1944 before he was unable to play in 1945. but they are still taken in context.

Bill Cowley won 2 Hart trophies in the diluted years and had a 71 and 72 point year. He was still a 30-40 point guy when the league was less diluted. When the real goalies and top defensemen and forwards harder to play against were around.

 

[tarheelhockey]

There's no question that the league was weaker during this season. There's not even a logical challenge that can be made. If you swap out NHL players for minor leaguers en masse, the league gets weaker. It is what it is.

This is the scale of difference that we are talking about starting with 1942-43, showing ONLY players who did active military service.

Montreal
Joe Benoit (44, 45)
Bunny Dame (43, 44)
Marcel Dheere (44, 45)
Gordie Drillon (44, 45, 46)
Polly Drouin (43, 44, 45, 46)
Frank Eddolls (43, 44)
Cliff Goupille (44, 45)
Tony Graboski (44, 45)
Jimmy Haggarty (43, 44, 45, 46)
Frank Mailley (44, 45)
Irv McGibbon (43, 44, 45)
Kenny Mosdell (43, 44)
Jack Portland (44, 45)
Ken Reardon (43, 44, 45)
Stu Smith (43, 44, 45)

Detroit
Murray Armstrong (43)
Dick Behling (44, 45)
Gerry Brown (43, 44, 45)
Eddie Bush (43, 44, 45, 46)
Lloyd Duran (43, 44, 45, 46)
Joe Fisher (44, 45)
Art Herchenratter (42, 43, 44, 45)
Tony Licari* (43, 44, 45, 46)
Pat Lundy* (45)
Doug McCaig (43, 44, 45)
Butch McDonald (44)
Pat McReavy (43, 44)
Alex Motter (44, 45)
Johnny Mowers (44, 45, 46)
Jimmy Orlando (44, 45)
Bernie Ruelle (45, 46)
John Sherf (43)
Thain Simon* (44, 45)
+ Joe Turner (43, 44)
Eddie Wares (44, 45)
Rudy Zunich* (43)

Toronto
Syl Apps (44, 45)
Baz Bastien* (44, 45)
Garth Boesch (43, 44, 45)
Lex Chisholm (42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47)
Bobby Copp (43, 44, 45, 46)
Ernie Dickens (43, 44, 45)
Hank Goldup (44)
Jack Hamilton (45)
Red Heron (43, 44, 45)
Jack Ingoldsby (44)
Buck Jones (44, 45, 46)
Rudolph Kampman (43, 44, 45)
Nick Knott (43, 44, 45)
Pete Langelle (43, 44, 45, 46)
Shep Mayer (43, 44, 45, 46)
Johnny McCreedy (43, 44)
Howie Meeker* (44, 45)
Don Metz (43, 44)
Nick Metz (43, 44)
Bud Poile (44, 45, 46)
Sweeney Schriner (44)
Wally Stanowski (43, 44)
Gaye Stewart (44, 45)
Billy Taylor (44, 45)
Rhys Thomson (44, 45)

Boston
Ed Barry* (45)
Bobby Bauer (42, 43, 44, 45)
Frank Brimsek (44, 45)
Gordie Bruce (43, 44, 45)
Jack Church (43, 44, 45)
Roy Conacher (43, 44, 45)
Woody Dumart (42, 43, 44, 45)
Murray Henderson (43, 44, 45)
Frank Mario (43, 44)
Norm McAtee* (45)
Jack McGill* (41, 43, 44)
Terry Reardon (43, 44, 45)
Milt Schmidt (42, 43, 44, 45)
Jack Shewchuk (44)
Bill Shill (42, 43, 44, 45)
Cliff Thompson (43, 44, 45)
Eddie Wiseman (43, 44)

Chicago
George Allen (45)
Max Bentley (43, 44, 45)
Leo Carbol (44, 45)
Bob Carse (44, 45)
Bill Carse (43, 44, 45)
George Johnston (44, 45)
Alex Kaleta (43, 44, 45)
John Mariucci (43, 44, 45)
Joe Papike (43, 44)
Leo Reise* (43, 44, 45)
Aud Tuten (44, 45, 46)

Rangers
Joe Bell (43, 44, 45)
Lin Bend (44, 45)
Hal Brown* (43, 44, 45)
Norm Burns (43, 44, 45)
Scotty Cameron (44, 45, 46)
Neil Colville (43, 44, 45)
Jim Drummond (43, 44)
Archie Fraser (45, 46)
Cal Gardner (45)
+ Dudley Garrett (43, 44)
Hank Goldup (44)
Bill Juzda (43, 44, 45)
Max Labovitch (43, 45)
Hub Macey (43, 44, 45, 46)
Gus Mancuso (44, 45)
Ken McAuley* (43)
+ Russell McConnell (42, 43) - amateur player, turned down pro contract to enlist
Vic Myles (45)
Muzz Patrick (42, 43, 44, 45)
Lynn Patrick (44, 45)
Alf Pike (44, 45)
Chuck Rayner (43, 44, 45)
Spence Tatchell (44, 45)
Fred Thurier (43, 44)
Norm Tustin (43, 44, 45, 46)

* Prospect who had not been in the NHL prior to the war, but came back and entered the NHL within 2 seasons, and was at least 20 years old at the time of military service. Reasonable bet that he would have at least cameoed in the NHL had he not gone overseas.
+ Killed in action


Unless they have a * by their name, every one of these players was in the NHL immediately pre-war. Bear in mind that 127 players skated at least one game in 1944-45, and I count 114 names on this list. Effectively, we are talking about losing an entire league's worth of talent over the course of about 4 years.

 

[daver]

In goal scoring? nobody is denying he is one of the greatest goal scorers of all time. A lot of players had career years during those years. Richard's 73 points was amazing. So was Doug bentley's 73 points in 1943 and 77 points in 1944 before he was unable to play in 1945. but they are still taken in context.

Bill Cowley won 2 Hart trophies in the diluted years and had a 71 and 72 point year. He was still a 30-40 point guy when the league was less diluted. When the real goalies and top defensemen and forwards harder to play against were around.

Players having their highest point totals doesn't necessarily mean they had career years. Scoring placements should be the metric to measure whether a season is a career best or not.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Here's another one:

Of the 7 starting goaltenders in 1941-42, only Bibeault, Brimsek, Mowers and Broda played any pro hockey outside of the forces in the next 3 seasons, and only Bibeault played in 1943-44 and 1944-45.

 

[JackSlater]

There's no question that the league was weaker during this season. There's not even a logical challenge that can be made. If you swap out NHL players for minor leaguers en masse, the league gets weaker. It is what it is.

This is the scale of difference that we are talking about starting with 1942-43, showing ONLY players who did active military service.

Montreal
Joe Benoit (44, 45)
Bunny Dame (43, 44)
Marcel Dheere (44, 45)
Gordie Drillon (44, 45, 46)
Polly Drouin (43, 44, 45, 46)
Frank Eddolls (43, 44)
Cliff Goupille (44, 45)
Tony Graboski (44, 45)
Jimmy Haggarty (43, 44, 45, 46)
Frank Mailley (44, 45)
Irv McGibbon (43, 44, 45)
Kenny Mosdell (43, 44)
Jack Portland (44, 45)
Ken Reardon (43, 44, 45)
Stu Smith (43, 44, 45)

Detroit
Murray Armstrong (43)
Dick Behling (44, 45)
Gerry Brown (43, 44, 45)
Eddie Bush (43, 44, 45, 46)
Lloyd Duran (43, 44, 45, 46)
Joe Fisher (44, 45)
Art Herchenratter (42, 43, 44, 45)
Tony Licari* (43, 44, 45, 46)
Pat Lundy* (45)
Doug McCaig (43, 44, 45)
Butch McDonald (44)
Pat McReavy (43, 44)
Alex Motter (44, 45)
Johnny Mowers (44, 45, 46)
Jimmy Orlando (44, 45)
Bernie Ruelle (45, 46)
John Sherf (43)
Thain Simon* (44, 45)
+ Joe Turner (43, 44)
Eddie Wares (44, 45)
Rudy Zunich* (43)

Toronto
Syl Apps (44, 45)
Baz Bastien* (44, 45)
Garth Boesch (43, 44, 45)
Lex Chisholm (42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47)
Bobby Copp (43, 44, 45, 46)
Ernie Dickens (43, 44, 45)
Hank Goldup (44)
Jack Hamilton (45)
Red Heron (43, 44, 45)
Jack Ingoldsby (44)
Buck Jones (44, 45, 46)
Rudolph Kampman (43, 44, 45)
Nick Knott (43, 44, 45)
Pete Langelle (43, 44, 45, 46)
Shep Mayer (43, 44, 45, 46)
Johnny McCreedy (43, 44)
Howie Meeker* (44, 45)
Don Metz (43, 44)
Nick Metz (43, 44)
Bud Poile (44, 45, 46)
Sweeney Schriner (44)
Wally Stanowski (43, 44)
Gaye Stewart (44, 45)
Billy Taylor (44, 45)
Rhys Thomson (44, 45)

Boston
Ed Barry* (45)
Bobby Bauer (42, 43, 44, 45)
Frank Brimsek (44, 45)
Gordie Bruce (43, 44, 45)
Jack Church (43, 44, 45)
Roy Conacher (43, 44, 45)
Woody Dumart (42, 43, 44, 45)
Murray Henderson (43, 44, 45)
Frank Mario (43, 44)
Norm McAtee* (45)
Jack McGill* (41, 43, 44)
Terry Reardon (43, 44, 45)
Milt Schmidt (42, 43, 44, 45)
Jack Shewchuk (44)
Bill Shill (42, 43, 44, 45)
Cliff Thompson (43, 44, 45)
Eddie Wiseman (43, 44)

Chicago
George Allen (45)
Max Bentley (43, 44, 45)
Leo Carbol (44, 45)
Bob Carse (44, 45)
Bill Carse (43, 44, 45)
George Johnston (44, 45)
Alex Kaleta (43, 44, 45)
John Mariucci (43, 44, 45)
Joe Papike (43, 44)
Leo Reise* (43, 44, 45)
Aud Tuten (44, 45, 46)

Rangers
Joe Bell (43, 44, 45)
Lin Bend (44, 45)
Hal Brown* (43, 44, 45)
Norm Burns (43, 44, 45)
Scotty Cameron (44, 45, 46)
Neil Colville (43, 44, 45)
Jim Drummond (43, 44)
Archie Fraser (45, 46)
Cal Gardner (45)
+ Dudley Garrett (43, 44)
Hank Goldup (44)
Bill Juzda (43, 44, 45)
Max Labovitch (43, 45)
Hub Macey (43, 44, 45, 46)
Gus Mancuso (44, 45)
Ken McAuley* (43)
+ Russell McConnell (42, 43) - amateur player, turned down pro contract to enlist
Vic Myles (45)
Muzz Patrick (42, 43, 44, 45)
Lynn Patrick (44, 45)
Alf Pike (44, 45)
Chuck Rayner (43, 44, 45)
Spence Tatchell (44, 45)
Fred Thurier (43, 44)
Norm Tustin (43, 44, 45, 46)

* Prospect who had not been in the NHL prior to the war, but came back and entered the NHL within 2 seasons, and was at least 20 years old at the time of military service. Reasonable bet that he would have at least cameoed in the NHL had he not gone overseas.
+ Killed in action


Unless they have a * by their name, every one of these players was in the NHL immediately pre-war. Bear in mind that 127 players skated at least one game in 1944-45, and I count 114 names on this list. Effectively, we are talking about losing an entire league's worth of talent over the course of about 4 years.

To add to this thorough post, which does note that it only discusses players enlisted in the military, there was Chicago's Starting goaltender Sam LoPresti who survived his ship being torpedoed and various players including hall of famers like Doug Bentley and Bryan Hextall who didn't join the military but were not allowed to play in 1945 due to the war effort. A few random others like Mac Colville too. There are also additional Brooklyn Americans players such as 1942 Hart winner Tom Anderson, Hall of Famer Harry Watson, Bill Benson, Pat Egan, Norm Larson, Andy Branigan, Bill Summerhill, Peanuts O'Flaherty, Joe Krol, Wilf Field. You have a few more like Peter Slobodian, Ralph Wycherley, and Dave MacKay who left before the 1941-1942 season as well.

It's not easy to count exactly who was missing. This kind of exodus would be massive even in today's 31 team NHL but it's even more of a factor in a six team league with 15 players on each team.

 

[67 others]

Players having their highest point totals doesn't necessarily mean they had career years. Scoring placements should be the metric to measure whether a season is a career best or not.

yes and in those years they had their highest scoring placements ever.

A lot of players who were average to not NHL caliber ended up having top 10 scoring years. And as soon as the flood of real players came home, they were back to average or out of the league very quickly.

It was possible for tremendous players to dominate far beyond what they normally could under the circumstances and I have given several examples.

 

[tarheelhockey]

IMO the only way that Richard’s 1945 can be taken at something close to face value, is if we can demonstrate that 50 was not his actual ceiling that year... that he could actually have scored more against bad teams but throttled back and showed some mercy.

In this post I took a first crack at trying to “claw back” some value:

I'm willing to put some skin in this game, if it helps resolve the argument. The Habs played each opponent 10 times in 1944-45, and thankfully Richard played all 50 games.

1944-45 Maurice Richard, goals by opponent (listed in order of final league standings)

Detroit Red Wings - 16
Toronto Maple Leafs - 8
Boston Bruins - 10
Chicago Black Hawks - 8
New York Rangers - 8

OK, so this ends up being a little more interesting than expected. The Wings were young, but full of NHL talent at that time. They finished 2nd in the league, yet Richard torched them. Basically, he scored the 8 goals he put up against every other team and then added a hat trick and a 5-goal game to boot.

It's not as though the Habs held back against the lower-ranked teams. Here are their team results that season:

1944-45 Montreal Canadiens, GPG by opponent (listed in order of final league standings)

Detroit Red Wings - 4.6
Toronto Maple Leafs - 2.8
Boston Bruins - 5.3
Chicago Black Hawks - 4.0
New York Rangers - 6.1

That picture certainly looks like Richard pouring it on against real competition, while taking a breather during the joke matchups. IMO, has very strong vibes of a player being taken off the ice during uncontested matchups. To verify that theory with isolated results from "extreme" games:

11-09-44 - Habs 9, Hawks 2. Richard = 3
12-16-44 - Habs 8, Bruins 5. Richard = 2
11-27-44 - Habs 11, Bruins 3. Richard = 1
12-28-45 - Habs 9, Wings 1. Richard = 5
1-06-45 - Habs 10, Hawks 1. Richard = 1
1-13-45 - Habs 8, Wings 3. Richard = 1
2-08-45 - Habs 9, Rangers 4. Richard = 2
3-11-45 - Habs 11, Rangers 5. Richard = 2
TOTAL: Habs 75, Richard 17 (23%)

So the only case of Richard really running up stats during a blowout win was against the Wings, a solid team against whom Richard probably played the entire game and really brought it.

On the other end of the spectrum:
11-02-44 Habs 1, Leafs 4. Richard = 0
11-11-44 Habs 1, Leafs 3. Richard = 0
12-03-44 Habs 1, Hawks 2. Richard = 1
12-14-44 Habs 2, Leafs 2. Richard = 1
12-23-44 Habs 1, Hawks 2. Richard = 0
1-04-45 Habs 2, Leafs 4. Richard = 0
2-01-45 Habs 1, Hawks 1. Richard = 1
3-03-45 Habs 2, Leafs 3. Richard = 0
3-15-45 Habs 1, Wings 2. Richard = 1
TOTAL: Habs 12, Richard 4 (33%)

So Richard actually produced a higher proportion of the Habs' offense during these tight, low-scoring games than he did during blowouts. Again, this IMO points toward him being leveraged in games where it really counted, and rested (or just taking it easy) when things got circus-like.

There is at least something of an argument here that in a more intense, standard NHL environment, Richard would have been deployed more aggressively and would have trended closer to that more-competitive 33% of team scoring, which on a high-scoring team with a 50-game schedule would have meant a 1/3 share of about 150 goals, which would put him right around...
... wait for it...

... 50 goals

In sum:

- The Habs beat some teams senseless, but Richard actually didn’t take advantage to pad his stats. He was good for a goal per game regardless of the competition...

- ... except against Detroit, the second best team in the league. Richard singlehandedly ragdolled the Wings including a record-setting 5 goal, 8 point performance. IIRC that performance clinched 1st for Montreal.

- Richard scored a much greater share of the Habs’ goals in low scoring, close games than in blowouts (I explained earlier in the thread why this is exactly what we ought to expect, mathematically speaking).

This looks a LOT like a player who recognized the situation and held back, whether that means coasting or perhaps letting depth players take his shifts. One could at least make the argument (whether it’s fully valid... ehhhhhh) that Richard could have disgraced the league by racking up hat tricks on the weaker teams, scoring more like 60 or 70.

Of course, that still doesn’t mean it’s a full-value 50 goal season, but at least it provides some context that he could have performed at a genuine 50-goal level when he was going full-blast.