Where Does Auston Matthews Rank For You As A Goal Scorer All Time?

[Filthy Dangles]

I'm a leaf fan but because of the massive increase in goal scoring this era i still rate him below stammer and ovi

Matthews already has more rockets than Stammer, and one of Stammer's was shared/tied.

HIs Goals per game through Age26 season: .655, Stamkos: .548. I think that's as much him being a bit better as much as higher scoring era. I'd also give him the nod becuase of ways he scores and put a little more weight in EVG than PPG.

He's somewhere in the middle of them, but certainly closer to Stamkos than Ovechkin at this point.

 

[Toby91ca]

Since this thread is about goal scoring, you tell me which is better:

368 goals in 562 games played

vs

371 goals in 601 games played

 

[Legion34]

???
Ovechkin lead the league by 38 P and 62 G despite being a winger, Matthews is 285 P behind a leader and barely outscore his own teammate.
They are not comparable at all.

Not sure what those numbers are.

But to date. By age 26 Matthews has more total goals. More goals per game. More rockets. Has won scoring titles higher total goals (69 vs 65) and more 60 goal seasons (2-1)

While playing elite level D.

Matthews won every category by 26.
I don’t think Matthews will have the next 8 seasons that ovy had at all.
But to this point Matthews has clearly been better.

 

[x Tame Impala]

It's a group of baseball fans that tried to quickly make a hockey website so it's littered with baseball origin errors.

Their roster size adjustments are structurally broken. They adjust to having star players of the 50s play only 15 minutes in the adjusted formula. If you look at adjusted scoring in the 50s and 60s star players are all structurally underestimated by 10-25%. You end up with Art Ross winners adjusting below 10th in scoring finishers from today. The creators don't care about hockey history and are only looking for Gretzky and more modern stats to "look" right.

No roster size adjustment size is needed for baseball so they never bothered to think it through.

I've bought it up to them several times and they just don't care. I hate how ubiquitous the stats are here because it's a lazy formula that's repeated everywhere.

I think "adjusted" stats are fundamentally flawed regardless. Converting a bunch of data points from one era to another isn't automatically a guarantee of an accurate model. Data points in TODAY's game have enough of an issue being misused and/or misrepresented and this is for games happening live in front of our eyes.

I'll compare goals for/against and goalie SV% across the last 20 years because that's the hockey I've watched in my life so I'm comfortable making comparisons between the eras myself. But using data points from the league 20+ years ago and trying to wedge it into a unifying conversion seems to miss allllll the nuance that goes into a game of hockey. That nuance changes from era to era and personally I don't find the "adjusted goals" relevant or interesting at all. You had to be there at the time to see the games and fully appreciate a respective player's impact

 

[Randyne]

They adjust to having star players of the 50s play only 15 minutes in the adjusted formula.

I don't see here they adjusted some eras by 15 minutes, or do you mean in the 50s NHL played only 15 minutes? And HR didn't adjust it?

Adjusted Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Explaination of hockey stats adjusted for the era the games were played in.

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[jigglysquishy]

I don't see here they adjusted some eras by 15 minutes, or do you mean in the 50s NHL played only 15 minutes? And HR didn't adjust it?

Adjusted Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Explaination of hockey stats adjusted for the era the games were played in.

www.hockey-reference.com

They adjust uniformly by roster size.

So if the roster goes from 15 players to 18 they adjust all players down by 20%. But if you're a coach and you gain an extra line, you're not going to uniformly take minutes from all players. Maybe that 4th liner plays 8 minutes. But you're not going to take 2:40 from all three lines. Maybe you reduce your first line by 1:20, your second line by 2:40, and your third line by 4:00.

It's a structural misunderstanding of how coaches adapted to increased roster sizes.

 

[Randyne]

So if the roster goes from 15 players to 18 they adjust all players down by 20%. But if you're a coach and you gain an extra line, you're not going to uniformly take minutes from all players. Maybe that 4th liner plays 8 minutes. But you're not going to take 2:40 from all three lines. Maybe you reduce your first line by 1:20, your second line by 2:40, and your third line by 4:00.

It's a structural misunderstanding of how coaches adapted to increased roster sizes.

it's 16 at home and 15 on the road, so it's down by 14% (.86).
Sadly there is no TOI stats for that era.
Even 14% difference is not enough to cover huge 144 G in 8 seasons gap between different systems. It's too big.

 

[Tie Domi Esquire]

He's one of the best until they change the sport again in the next era to make it easier and artificially boost numbers.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Why is this so much different from Hockey-Reference site?
Ovi's best 8 = 481
Bobby's best 8 = 416
HR Ovi has +65 goals over Bobby and your calculation -79 goals behind Bobby. It's ok to have 10-20 goals difference between calculations, but 144 goals difference in 8 seasons, something is very wrong.
Best 10 seasons adjusted HR:
View attachment 904637

I know @jigglysquishy already replied, but to give some additional comments -

Hockey-reference.com systematically underrates players from certain eras (particularly the Original Six era and the 1980's - which is why the results for Howe, Hull, Richard, Bossy and Gretzky are unreasonably low).

According to HR.com, from 1946 (the end of WWII) to 1967 (the last year before expansion), a span of 22 seasons, there were only two seasons that adjust to 60+ goals. That covers the peaks of some of the greatest goal-scorers in NHL history (Hull, Howe and Richard - among others). During the Dead Puck Era (1998 to 2004), HR.com says there were five adjusted 60+ goal seasons. This was an era that was relatively weak in high-end talent. When the players with the 2nd most, 3rd most, and T-5th most goals aren't in the Hall of Fame, you know that it isn't an era loaded with talent.

HR.com's output is telling us that the Dead Puck Era produced almost 8 times as many sixty goal seasons as the Original Six era did (on a per season basis). That conclusion is plainly false. The talent pool was larger during the DPE, but not anywhere close to eight times.

HR.com is also very harsh towards players from the 1980's. According to their website, that entire decade produced just three adjusted 60 goal seasons. There was with an immense amount of talent in the league - Gretzky at his peak, Bossy, several strong seasons from Lemieux - plus Kurri, Yzerman, etc. Yet 1930 alone (not the decade - just that one season) apparently produced more 60+ goal seasons than all of the 1980's!

I know that the people at hockey-reference.com mean well, but the authors aren't hockey fans. They try to use methods that work for baseball, but they don't always make sense for hockey. (Point shares, for example, can be horrendously misleading). Their output is probably usable if you're trying to compare 2014 to 2024, but it's essentially meaningless if you're trying to go much farther back.

(For what it's worth - I get a very similar number for Ovechkin's best ten years. I have 571, HR.com has 585 - a 2.5% difference. Stamkos is bang on - I have 473, HR.com has 474. Lemieux is very close - I have him at 499, HR.com has 503. I have Brett Hull at 511, HR.com has him at 518. The results are pretty close for players who peaked during the early/mid 1990's, or after the 2005 lockout. It's the other eras that HR.com struggles with).

 

[daver]

I know @jigglysquishy already replied, but to give some additional comments -

Hockey-reference.com systematically underrates players from certain eras (particularly the Original Six era and the 1980's - which is why the results for Howe, Hull, Richard, Bossy and Gretzky are unreasonably low).

According to HR.com, from 1946 (the end of WWII) to 1967 (the last year before expansion), a span of 22 seasons, there were only two seasons that adjust to 60+ goals. That covers the peaks of some of the greatest goal-scorers in NHL history (Hull, Howe and Richard - among others). During the Dead Puck Era (1998 to 2004), HR.com says there were five adjusted 60+ goal seasons. This was an era that was relatively weak in high-end talent. When the players with the 2nd most, 3rd most, and T-5th most goals aren't in the Hall of Fame, you know that it isn't an era loaded with talent.

HR.com's output is telling us that the Dead Puck Era produced almost 8 times as many sixty goal seasons as the Original Six era did (on a per season basis). That conclusion is plainly false. The talent pool was larger during the DPE, but not anywhere close to eight times.

HR.com is also very harsh towards players from the 1980's. According to their website, that entire decade produced just three adjusted 60 goal seasons. There was with an immense amount of talent in the league - Gretzky at his peak, Bossy, several strong seasons from Lemieux - plus Kurri, Yzerman, etc. Yet 1930 alone (not the decade - just that one season) apparently produced more 60+ goal seasons than all of the 1980's!

I know that the people at hockey-reference.com mean well, but the authors aren't hockey fans. They try to use methods that work for baseball, but they don't always make sense for hockey. (Point shares, for example, can be horrendously misleading). Their output is probably usable if you're trying to compare 2014 to 2024, but it's essentially meaningless if you're trying to go much farther back.

(For what it's worth - I get a very similar number for Ovechkin's best ten years. I have 571, HR.com has 585 - a 2.5% difference. Stamkos is bang on - I have 473, HR.com has 474. Lemieux is very close - I have him at 499, HR.com has 503. I have Brett Hull at 511, HR.com has him at 518. The results are pretty close for players who peaked during the early/mid 1990's, or after the 2005 lockout. It's the other eras that HR.com struggles with).

Posters quoting HR Adjusted stats should be taken as seriously as a flat earther at this point. There only purpose is to prop up an argument for someone's favourite player.

 

[Daishi]

Where do you even come up with this stuff

Because he can score 60+ in regular season when nobody cares but when his team's season is on the line he always disappears. If it was once... but it's every time.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I'd have top 20 now for sure.

The man is 26 years old.

At 26 Matthews has.

3 rockets
1 Hart
1 Ted Lindsay
Rookie of the year
2 60 goal seasons

AND he's on a better pace than Ovechkin was when he was 26.

I don't how he's not top 20 of all time he's going to hit 400 goals this year.and would probably already have 400 goals if not for the 2 covid shortented seasons

He's a hall of famer today

 

[LeProspector]

On pace for top5 all time, but so was Stamkos one point, things could change although I’d bet he’ll be #2 after Ovi by the end of it.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

This is 100% correct.

He's been on the decline for 2 years now.

60 Goal season, followed by a 50% decline to 40 goals and now, he hasn't even hit 40 goals yet.

The end is just around the corner for his offensive production.

As has been predicted now for 12 months.

This post didn't work out for you at all.

 

[bobholly39]

1-4 is in some order: Ovechkin, Gretzky, Lemieux, Hull
5-6 is Maurice Richard & Gordie Howe
7-9 is in some order: Bossy, Brett Hull, Phil Esposito
10& beyond include other names, such as Pavel Bure (probably my #10), Jagr and many others.

Auston Matthews is 100% going to be a top 10 goal-scorer of all-time. He might already be there, but I'm fine with the idea of waiting a few years for more longevity.

Either way - there's no way he doesn't finish #10 minimum. Anything beyond #10 he still needs to keep adding though.

I used to think the highest he could realistically finish was #7 - that there was no way he'd break into tier 2, let alone tier 1 of top 4 goal-scorers. At this point though? I'm open to anything. He's done so well that him ageing well and giving Ovechkin a run for his money as#1 is a possibility.

By the end of this upcoming season - good chance Auston Matthews will have approx ~50+ more career goals than Ovechkin did at the exact same age. And this is despite all the covid shortened seasons, etc.

 

[bobholly39]

I'd have top 20 now for sure.

The man is 26 years old.

At 26 Matthews has.

3 rockets
1 Hart
1 Ted Lindsay
Rookie of the year
2 60 goal seasons

AND he's on a better pace than Ovechkin was when he was 26.

I don't how he's not top 20 of all time he's going to hit 400 goals this year.and would probably already have 400 goals if not for the 2 covid shortented seasons

He's a hall of famer today

I was pretty confident Matthews would win the Rocket in 2020 too. Obviously he doesn't deserve it - and he was slightly beyind Ovi/Pastrnak - but if the season plays out naturally and goes till 82 games, he's the one I was banking on winning.

As to your post - he's definitely top 20 today. That's not a particularly high bar. Is Sidney Crosby a top 20 goal-scorer of all-time? He might be, and Matthews should already be ahead.

Matthews is probably a hall of famer today - and if not today, soon.

If he really wants to attack the top goal-scorers of all-time, he definitely needs to strengthen his playoff resume. His playoff goal-scoring is just bad career to date. Lots of room for improvement.

 

[Chuck Testa]

Kid can score. The different eras play a big part of where you can justifiably rank people so it's hard to really make an overall list.

For today's era though and since he's come in to the league, he's top 3 imo.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I was pretty confident Matthews would win the Rocket in 2020 too. Obviously he doesn't deserve it - and he was slightly beyind Ovi/Pastrnak - but if the season plays out naturally and goes till 82 games, he's the one I was banking on winning.

As to your post - he's definitely top 20 today. That's not a particularly high bar. Is Sidney Crosby a top 20 goal-scorer of all-time? He might be, and Matthews should already be ahead.

Matthews is probably a hall of famer today - and if not today, soon.

If he really wants to attack the top goal-scorers of all-time, he definitely needs to strengthen his playoff resume. His playoff goal-scoring is just bad career to date. Lots of room for improvement.

He's got time for that, I've said it before but Ovechkin didn't win until he was 32, Yzerman was around the same age.

Matthews is 26 there is time

 

[bobholly39]

He's got time for that, I've said it before but Ovechkin didn't win until he was 32, Yzerman was around the same age.

Matthews is 26 there is time

I'm not talking about Matthews's overall legacy here, but purely his individual performances as a goal-scorer in the playoffs.

Yes - Ovechkin's overall legacy (as Yzerman, and now Matthews) was hurt by not having playoff success (never beyond round 2, until 2018) for the longest time. And yes - the cup/smythe helped a lot. But despite lack of playoff success, Ovechkin had always done really well individually in playoffs.

Till age 26, Ovechkin's playoff scoring was:

30 goals in 51 playoff games. 48 goal pace over 82 games

Matthews is:

23 goals in 55 games, 34 goals pace over 82 games.

In this stretch - Ovechkin's playoff GPG is 4th in the league (and the top 3 above him have 10, 21, & 15 total games played, so he's really #1 with a minimum games played threshold).

In Matthew's stretch - he's 22nd.

If you include PPG - Matthews drops down to 34th, and Ovechkin maintains himself in 4th.

 

[FerrisRox]

He was playing against goalies who couldn’t skate and were wearing horse hair pads

It's absurd - and incorrect - to claim that goalies in the 1980's couldn't skate.

This is just insanely ignorant.

Also bizarre you would cite the horsehair pads as if it somehow made scoring so much easier yet you make no mention of the large discrepancy between the sticks Mike Bossy used versus the sticks being used today. It's almost like you left that out in order to try to tilt the argument in your favour.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I was pretty confident Matthews would win the Rocket in 2020 too. Obviously he doesn't deserve it - and he was slightly beyind Ovi/Pastrnak - but if the season plays out naturally and goes till 82 games, he's the one I was banking on winning.

As to your post - he's definitely top 20 today. That's not a particularly high bar. Is Sidney Crosby a top 20 goal-scorer of all-time? He might be, and Matthews should already be ahead.

Matthews is probably a hall of famer today - and if not today, soon.

If he really wants to attack the top goal-scorers of all-time, he definitely needs to strengthen his playoff resume. His playoff goal-scoring is just bad career to date. Lots of room for improvement.

I would say yes, Sid is objectively a top 20 goal scorer, he's going to hit 600 this year baring a season and/or career ending injury.

If he plays into his early 40's he's got a shot at 700 which is crazy because when I think of Sid I think more of assists than goals but he's got an outside shot at 700.

No question he's top 20 of all time

 

[Legion34]

It's absurd - and incorrect - to claim that goalies in the 1980's couldn't skate.

This is just insanely ignorant.

Also bizarre you would cite the horsehair pads as if it somehow made scoring so much easier yet you make no mention of the large discrepancy between the sticks Mike Bossy used versus the sticks being used today. It's almost like you left that out in order to try to tilt the argument in your favour.

Look at the goals in the 80s vs today.
This isn’t hard.

Rick freaking vaive had 3 50 goal seasons in a row.

Bossy being the best goal scorer ever despite only winning 2 rockets in his entire shortened career where he played 21-30 means there is no way he can be considered the best goal scorer of all time.


Neither is Matthews by the way. It’s silly to say bossy is the best goal scorer ever

 

[FerrisRox]

Bossy being the best goal scorer ever despite only winning 2 rockets in his entire shortened career where he played 21-30 means there is no way he can be considered the best goal scorer of all time.

Why are you telling me this?

Do you think I said Mike Bossy was the best goal scorer of all time?

 

[filinski77]

I would say yes, Sid is objectively a top 20 goal scorer, he's going to hit 600 this year baring a season and/or career ending injury.

If he plays into his early 40's he's got a shot at 700 which is crazy because when I think of Sid I think more of assists than goals but he's got an outside shot at 700.

No question he's top 20 of all time

How is Sid objectively a top 20 goal scorer?

As of right now, within his own generation, Ovechkin, Matthews, Stamkos, Kovalchuk are better goal scorers.

And then add another 3-5 years of compiling, McDavid and Draisaitl will both pass him as well. Both have better goal finishes already, and have years to add more high-end finishes as well.

And then looking at that second list below: Iginla was better in my opinion, Pastrnak and Mackinnon can both definitely pass Crosby too, and then just for comparison purposes, other than the raw compiling, guys like Perry and Heatley are pretty on par to Crosby's too. Tavares is a throw in to illustrate that Crosbys top-end goal finishes aren't really that impressive other than 2 rockets.

Ovechkin	9 rockets
Matthews	1/1/1/2/3
Draisaitl	2/2/4/4/4
Stamkos	1/1/2/2/2/4/7/9
McDavid	1/2/6/6/7/10
Kovalchuk	1/2/3/4/6/6/7/8
Pastrnak	1/2/7/10
Perry	1/2/6/9/10
Iginla	1/1/3/3
Heatley	2/5/6/8/8/9
Crosby	1/1/7/7
Tavares	3/3/4/10
Mackinnon	4/6/9/9/9

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

How is Sid objectively a top 20 goal scorer?

As of right now, within his own generation, Ovechkin, Matthews, Stamkos, Kovalchuk are better goal scorers.

And then add another 3-5 years of compiling, McDavid and Draisaitl will both pass him as well. Both have better goal finishes already, and have years to add more high-end finishes as well.

And then looking at that second list below: Iginla was better in my opinion, Pastrnak and Mackinnon can both definitely pass Crosby too, and then just for comparison purposes, other than the raw compiling, guys like Perry and Heatley are pretty on par to Crosby's too. Tavares is a throw in to illustrate that Crosbys top-end goal finishes aren't really that impressive other than 2 rockets.

Ovechkin	9 rockets
Matthews	1/1/1/2/3
Draisaitl	2/2/4/4/4
Stamkos	1/1/2/2/2/4/7/9
McDavid	1/2/6/6/7/10
Kovalchuk	1/2/3/4/6/6/7/8
Pastrnak	1/2/7/10
Perry	1/2/6/9/10
Iginla	1/1/3/3
Heatley	2/5/6/8/8/9
Crosby	1/1/7/7
Tavares	3/3/4/10
Mackinnon	4/6/9/9/9

Like I said baring a career ending injury he's going to hit 600 career goals this yea, he's got an outside shot at 700 career goals and that's with being seen as more of a play maker.

How is a 600+ goal man, possibly a 700 career goal man not a top 20 goal scorer?