Why is Peter Stastny so severely underrated?

[Dennis Bonvie]

Nasty stuff.

The days of instant retribution.

 

[BraveCanadian]

The days of instant retribution.

Stuff like that happened all the time back then.. imagine the suspension he'd get today..

 

[The Panther]

Just here to say that Stastny should be ahead of guys like Hawerchuk and Savard.

As far as top forwards of the five years 1981-82 through 1985-86 (not counting Lemieux) goes, I'd say:
1. Gretzky
2. Stastny
3. Bossy
4. Hawerchuk / Savard
5. Trottier / Kurri / Messier / Dionne

 

[blogofmike]

He also loses the What If? argument of a Makarov because he actually played in the NHL, so there isn’t exactly a lot of re-appreciation being done regarding his career.

From 1980-81 thru 1987-88 Stastny and Makarov both scored 1.5 PPG in league play. Makarov was playing with the best linemates possible in a league practically designed for him to score points, while Stastny was on a fairly average Nordiques team.

 

[alko]

Nasty stuff.

Beast from the East.

 

[VanIslander]

Here Marian Stastny heads to the box and Peter Stastny scores a shorthanded goal by stealing the puck from a Leaf, putting Czechoslovakia up 4 to 2 against Toronto in a 1978 touring game.

He did not start his career at age 24. Before the NHL he was a star in a world championship gold-medal defeat of the Russians and had 4 points in the 1976 Canada Cup.

 

[The Panther]

Just seeing that Peter had 90 even-strength points in only 75 games in 1982-83. Let's say that's worth 97 ES points in 80 games -- he's now approaching early and late-Gretzky-prime levels of ES production.

(For reference here, Mike Bossy's highest ES points was 100, Lafleur's 104, Kurri's was 101, Mario's 102, Yzerman's 101, Jagr's 95.)

 

[MadLuke]

Just here to say that Stastny should be ahead of guys like Hawerchuk and Savard.

He was ahead (by a good amount) in the nhl.com ranking.

The question to the list/premise of this thread is more, is he ahead of the Lindros, Malkin, Francis, Perreault, Lafontaine that were ranked above him I suppose (and is it by a severe amount).

 

[ResilientBeast]

He was ahead (big a good amount) in the nhl.com ranking.

The question to the list/premise of this thread is more, is he ahead of the Lindros, Malkin, Francis, Perreault, Lafontaine that were ranked above him I suppose (and is it by a severe amount).

Looking at HOH rankings he's ahead of those 4 or at least on the same level. Malkin however has added to his legacy considerably since then.

Malkin is certainly better than Stastny by now

 

[Batis]

From 1980-81 thru 1987-88 Stastny and Makarov both scored 1.5 PPG in league play. Makarov was playing with the best linemates possible in a league practically designed for him to score points, while Stastny was on a fairly average Nordiques team.

During that time frame Makarov averaged 1.52 ppg in a league where only 3 other players with more than 150 games played had a points per game average of 1.00 or higher. Stastny averaged 1.49 ppg in a league where 42 other players with more than 150 games played had a points per game average of 1.00 or higher. As you can see points were clearly more difficult to come by in the Soviet League than in the NHL during this time frame (largely due to the Soviet League scorekeepers awarding far fewer assists per goal than the NHL scorekeepers) and comparing points per game averages of players between the two leagues is therefore in my opinion a rather useless exercise. And no I am not by any means saying that the Soviet League was superior to the NHL but only pointing out that scoring lofty point totals seems to have been easier in the NHL.

Comparing their achiviements in Europe up until their 24th birthdays (the age when Statsny left Czechoslovakia) is in my opinion something that tells us much more in a comparison between these two players. Here is such a breakdown made by Theokritos.

Batis has already compared their European careers up until 1980 when Šťastný left for the NHL. But to make the comparison fairer, I'll do the same for both players' careers up to their 24th birthday (Šťastný left Czechoslovakia just one months before turning 24).

Peter Šťastný before turning 24:
Ranked among Czechoslovak players: 1st, 6th, 12th, 12th, 15th.
Ranked among European players: 8th.
World Championship awards: none.

With that record under his belt, Šťastný came to the NHL and immediately proved to be one of the top scorers in the league (#6 in his rookie season, top 3 in the following seasons).

Sergey Makarov before turning 24:
Ranked among Soviet players: 1st, 2nd, 4th, 4th, 9th.
Ranked among European players: 1st, 4th, 4t, 6th.
World Championship awards: Best Forward 1979, All-star team 1979 and 1981 and 1982.

Note that in Šťastný's best season when he was voted Player of the Year in Czechoslovakia he was also voted 8th among European players overall. In the very same season (1979-1980), Makarov was voted Player of the Year in the USSR and was also voted 1st among all European players. That should give you a perspective on what being voted #1 in Czechoslovakia and #1 in the USSR are roughly worth when you compare them.

It's obvious that Makarov's pre-24 record is much more impressive than Šťastný's pre-24 record. If the latter player still turned out to be a top-6 scorer in the NHL right away and a top-3 scorer after a season of adjustment, what do we realistically have to assume about the former, clearly superior player?

In a hypothetical situation where Stastny had stayed in Europe throughout his entire prime he really would have had a mountain to climb to be able to compare even somewhat favourably to Makarov who throughout his career ranked top-4 among European players (in the Izvestia voting) a record number of 10 times and made the WHC All-Star team 8 tournaments in a row.

 

[Thenameless]

Peter Stastny is one of those players where the "what if" scenario can certainly apply. While it's true that he could have benefited from playing with his brothers, I think the greater truth is that starting his NHL career so late and having to assimilate to a new culture on top of that, made things a "net more difficult" situation for him. It's certainly possible that had he grown up and played in North America, and started at 18 or 19 in the NHL, his production might have been that much better. As it stands, being second in scoring for the 80's decade is no joke.

 

[The Panther]

He was ahead (by a good amount) in the nhl.com ranking.

The question to the list/premise of this thread is more, is he ahead of the Lindros, Malkin, Francis, Perreault, Lafontaine that were ranked above him I suppose (and is it by a severe amount).

I see. Well, I would say he's not above Lindros and he's about even with Perreault. But I'd rank him above Malkin (just), and certainly Francis and Lafontaine.

I know some will think I'm crazy for ranking him higher than Malkin (whom I also like), but I think Stastny had a higher load to carry for several years. I tend to be more impressed with guys who have to be the #1 guy on a club for several years and thrive in that role. (And yes, I know, when Crosby was injured, Malkin stepped it up. But he didn't have to carry a team for eight or nine years.)

The over-rating of Ron Francis needs to stop. When Stastny and Francis were each the 'top guy' on their mediocre-clubs, from 1982-83 to 1989-90, here's how they compared:
Stastny 811 points (1.37 / game)
Francis 677 points (1.15 / game)

Yes, Francis had a longer and more accomplished career, and he hit some scoring heights in '96 when he spent the whole season on the PP with Lemieux and Jagr. But Stastny's first NHL season was at Francis's age in 1987-88 (his 7th season!). I'm pretty sure if Stastny had been dealt to the Flames or Penguins or whatever in 1988, he could have had some big early-30s seasons, too.

Anyway, this 'ranking' thing is often a question of whether we're looking at career accomplishments in total or peak/prime in isolation... or whatever. It's all fluid, depending on parameters.

 

[Big Phil]

if we're asking why stastny was underrepresented in honours and award voting, i think on top of the timing of his best seasons relative to savard and hawerchuk he wasn't head and shoulders better than his peers and if it's the 1980s, saying stastny > a guy from a farm in the canadian prairies (trottier finishes ahead of him in '82 and '84) isn't just a stylistic preference, it's a moral argument.

if you say that the communist czechoslovakian system can build a better star scoring center than the real or imagined frozen ponds of canadiana, that means a lot more in 1982/83/84 than it does in, say, '94 when fedorov wins the hart and hasek wins the vezina. by the time we're arguing about whether kovalchuk or heatley deserves the calder (before kovalchuk got hurt and heatley won it by default) it's still not nothing, but it's basically just a question of aesthetics.

I've looked at those years, and while Trottier is outscored by him in 1982 and 1984 he is barely outscored by him. Throw in Trottier's physical play and defensive presence and it is easy to see why he was picked ahead of Stastny for the 2nd team all-star. 1983 he and Savard are three points apart. I am not sure Stastny was discriminated against. He became a Canadian citizen and was picked for Team Canada in 1984. Those are still great seasons by the 2nd team all-star in those other years.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I've looked at those years, and while Trottier is outscored by him in 1982 and 1984 he is barely outscored by him. Throw in Trottier's physical play and defensive presence and it is easy to see why he was picked ahead of Stastny for the 2nd team all-star. 1983 he and Savard are three points apart. I am not sure Stastny was discriminated against. He became a Canadian citizen and was picked for Team Canada in 1984. Those are still great seasons by the 2nd team all-star in those other years.

discriminated is a strong word. but i do feel like when it was close and another guy with the numbers on his side would have gotten the benefit of the doubt, stastny didn’t.

in every single year of the 80s, the #2 scoring center was the second team all star except the three years it was stastny. yes trottier has a lot of positives on his side beyond scoring, even if he is trailing by eight or ten points. but does savard in 83? barry pederson in 84?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

generationally, stastny was born in the middle of a twenty month stretch that also included trottier, federko, mark howe, and joey mullen.

howe enters the league fully formed in 1980. ditto stastny in 81. mullen finally enters the league in 82 and puts up 59 points in 45 regular season games, 18 points in 10 games in playoffs.

by 1980, trottier already had more than 400 points and a hart trophy. federko already had 160 points over three seasons, including his first top ten in scoring season.

the other three’s entrance into the league were delayed for very different reasons, but if you add four seasons to their careers, how much better would their resumes all be?

mark howe could be chasing 1,000 points as a dman, mullen is probably a 1,200 point scorer, and stastny... he might have broken 1,500.

 

[blogofmike]

During that time frame Makarov averaged 1.52 ppg in a league where only 3 other players with more than 150 games played had a points per game average of 1.00 or higher. Stastny averaged 1.49 ppg in a league where 42 other players with more than 150 games played had a points per game average of 1.00 or higher. As you can see points were clearly more difficult to come by in the Soviet League than in the NHL during this time frame (largely due to the Soviet League scorekeepers awarding far fewer assists per goal than the NHL scorekeepers) and comparing points per game averages of players between the two leagues is therefore in my opinion a rather useless exercise. And no I am not by any means saying that the Soviet League was superior to the NHL but only pointing out that scoring lofty point totals seems to have been easier in the NHL.

Comparing their achiviements in Europe up until their 24th birthdays (the age when Statsny left Czechoslovakia) is in my opinion something that tells us much more in a comparison between these two players. Here is such a breakdown made by Theokritos.



In a hypothetical situation where Stastny had stayed in Europe throughout his entire prime he really would have had a mountain to climb to be able to compare even somewhat favourably to Makarov who throughout his career ranked top-4 among European players (in the Izvestia voting) a record number of 10 times and made the WHC All-Star team 8 tournaments in a row.

How much of that mountain is made up by Makarov, and how much of the mountain is Makarov's beneficial environment?

Comparing leagues can't be definitive, but counting 1.0 PPG scorers doesn't accurately reflect the situation. It should be noted that Makarov's teammates likely made up a good chunk of the top scorers. Based on a glance at hockeydb CSKA was routinely scoring 5-6 goals per game, and even pushed 7 goals per game in 1984. Stastny's Nords were peaking around 4.5 GPG on the high end, and if we're using age comparisons, the Nords were under 3.5 GPG in Stastny's 111 point age 31 season. Stastny was still comparable to the younger stars like Savard and Hawerchuk at an age when Makarov was a dead ringer in terms of productivity for an off-peak Joe Mullen.

From 1979-80 to 1988-89, Stastny was the highest non-Gretzky scorer in the NHL despite playing on an average team and the fact that he didn't even play in 79-80. If he were to have switched places with Makarov, the top NHL's top non-Gretzky scorer might be able to be the top Soviet scorer, especially if he's given a plum spot on the Green Unit. Without the star-studded supporting cast, would Makarov average over 100 points a year for a decade while playing on an average team in a division with Boston, Buffalo, and Montreal?

That would be a big question mark for Makarov, since he was always playing in a Goldilocks zone and never showed that he could thrive outside of one.

 

[Batis]

How much of that mountain is made up by Makarov, and how much of the mountain is Makarov's beneficial environment?

Comparing leagues can't be definitive, but counting 1.0 PPG scorers doesn't accurately reflect the situation. It should be noted that Makarov's teammates likely made up a good chunk of the top scorers. Based on a glance at hockeydb CSKA was routinely scoring 5-6 goals per game, and even pushed 7 goals per game in 1984. Stastny's Nords were peaking around 4.5 GPG on the high end, and if we're using age comparisons, the Nords were under 3.5 GPG in Stastny's 111 point age 31 season. Stastny was still comparable to the younger stars like Savard and Hawerchuk at an age when Makarov was a dead ringer in terms of productivity for an off-peak Joe Mullen.

From 1979-80 to 1988-89, Stastny was the highest non-Gretzky scorer in the NHL despite playing on an average team and the fact that he didn't even play in 79-80. If he were to have switched places with Makarov, the top NHL's top non-Gretzky scorer might be able to be the top Soviet scorer, especially if he's given a plum spot on the Green Unit. Without the star-studded supporting cast, would Makarov average over 100 points a year for a decade while playing on an average team in a division with Boston, Buffalo, and Montreal?

That would be a big question mark for Makarov, since he was always playing in a Goldilocks zone and never showed that he could thrive outside of one.

You make it sound like someone decided to single out Makarov and give him everything on a silver platter when he on the contrary had to earn his spot and step by step worked himself up through the stacked line-up of both CSKA and the national team. That Makarov then managed to lead a NHL dynasty level team like the 80s CSKA Moscow in points per game 10 seasons in a row is in my opinion an absolutely incredible achievement.

I would also like to point out that the Green Unit did not even exist yet during the time when Makarovs and Stastnys careers overlapped in Europe and Makarov clearly was considered the greater player of the two by the European observers despite being two years younger than Stastny. When the Green Unit was put together ahead of the 81/82 season Makarov who had just turned 23 at the time had already won 2 Soviet League scoring titles, 1 Soviet League goalscoring title, 1 Soviet player of the year award (plus 3 times top-4 in the voting), 1 Izvestia golden stick award (plus 3 times top-4 in the voting), 1 WHC Directorate best forward award and 2 WHC first team all-star selections. In other words achievements that completely dwarfs anything that Stastny managed to achieve in Europe up until his 24th birthday.

Makarovs statistical dominance over his Soviet peers does in my opinion also suggest that he in his prime was on a clearly higher level than Stastny offensively. My reasoning for believing that can be found in this post.

Great work. Your adjusted 7-year VsX for Makarov is very close to the range (102.2-108.3) where I estimate his score to be. If we look at how high the second highest scoring player from any of the countries which made up the Soviet Union (A Russian in every season but one) has ranked among Canadian players in the NHL-scoring race from the first season (92/93) that the majority of the top former Soviet players played in the league and had at least one year of adjustment time under their belt we can see that the second highest scoring "former Soviet" player in modern times on average has fallen somewhere between the sixth and the seventh highest scoring Canadian player. Since I consider the Soviet hockey of the 80´s to have been on a somewhat higher level than modern Russian hockey I decided that assuming that the second highest scoring Soviet on average was as good as the sixth highest scoring Canadian would be more accurate. So what I did was that I looked at how Makarovs 7-year Vs2 in the Soviet League compared to some all time great players 7-year Vs6 among Canadian players only. While I made some changes to the system I took the inspiration for doing this from this post from Seventieslord. ATD 2017 Draft Thread I

Makarovs 7-year Vs2 in the Soviet League is 123.1. And this is how some of the forwards who have cases for being in the 5-20 range all-time does when it comes to 7-year Vs6 among Canadians. (Only post-consolidation numbers for Morenz)

Mikita 124.6
Beliveau 124.5
Crosby 123.4
Richard 122.8
Hull 121.8
Lafleur 117.5
Morenz 114.9

Makarov compares very well to any of them and considering that all of these players are in the 102.2-108.3 range when it comes to 7-year VsX I think that this range is a good estimate for Makarov as well.

 

[Vilica]

You make it sound like someone decided to single out Makarov and give him everything on a silver platter when he on the contrary had to earn his spot and step by step worked himself up through the stacked line-up of both CSKA and the national team. That Makarov then managed to lead a NHL dynasty level team like the 80s CSKA Moscow in points per game 10 seasons in a row is in my opinion an absolutely incredible achievement.

I think the broader point is not to denigrate Makarov's accomplishments, which were extensive, but that the structure of the Russian league was so biased to the benefit of Makarov ('s statistics). To best illustrate that, consider a hypothetical where Makarov does something or says something that gets him blacklisted by Soviet officials, and he plays out his career at Traktor Chelyabinsk, and instead the Soviets promote Alexander Kozhevnikov or Sergei Kapustin (or any number of players that I just learned about) to replace him at CSKA. Nothing changes results-wise, CSKA still wins everything, and while those players might not have lead in PPG for 10 straight seasons, Makarov certainly doesn't put up the numbers he did playing for a Traktor team that finished bottom half of the league. I mean, look at this comparison between CSKA and Traktor in goals scored for Makarov's entire tenure in the Soviet league.

	Games	CSKA GF	GF/G	Traktor GF	GF/G	Ratio
76-77	36	220	6.111	128	3.556	1.719
77-78	36	215	5.972	130	3.611	1.654
78-79	44	277	6.295	126	2.864	2.198
79-80	44	306	6.955	139	3.159	2.201
80-81	49	299	6.102	178	3.633	1.680
81-82	47	269	5.723	198	3.536	1.619
82-83	44	261	5.932	100	2.273	2.610
83-84	44	286	6.500	103	2.341	2.777
84-85	40	221	5.525	81	2.382	2.319
85-86	40	219	5.475	87	2.175	2.517
86-87	40	223	5.575	84	2.100	2.655
87-88	44	230	5.227	126	2.864	1.825
88-89	44	224	5.091	113	2.568	1.982

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

(Traktor played more games in 81-82 [56 to 47] and less in 84-85 [34 to 40] than CSKA.)

The points where CSKA pulls players from Traktor are obvious - Makarov and Starshinov leave after 77-78, Bykov leaves after 81-82 (along with Belousov going to Japan to play). Makarov/Bykov would've been a fine foundation for a strong Traktor team to compete against CSKA in the 80s, but instead they were transferred to CSKA and Traktor left with no return on those players. That's the biggest issue I have with Soviet competition, that the best players on other teams inevitably become teammates on the strongest team, and no compensation to those other teams when the strongest team takes their players.

Let's lean into the Makarov/Bykov team a bit more - assume Traktor averages around 3.5 goals a game with them, and that Makarov scores a point on about 30-35% of those goals (I'm adjusting for the fact that he would have taken a great share of the offense than at CSKA, as well as that the Soviet league didn't really track secondaries, so this is just primary points). That translates to around 50-55 points in a 44 game season, or 45-50 points in a 40 game season. That's about 1.3 PPG compared to his 1.6 PPG playing for CSKA in that period (as a percentage of CSKA goals, Makarov's point totals fluctuated between 25 and 30%).

 

[Thenameless]

The over-rating of Ron Francis needs to stop. When Stastny and Francis were each the 'top guy' on their mediocre-clubs, from 1982-83 to 1989-90, here's how they compared:
Stastny 811 points (1.37 / game)
Francis 677 points (1.15 / game)

Yes, Francis had a longer and more accomplished career, and he hit some scoring heights in '96 when he spent the whole season on the PP with Lemieux and Jagr. But Stastny's first NHL season was at Francis's age in 1987-88 (his 7th season!). I'm pretty sure if Stastny had been dealt to the Flames or Penguins or whatever in 1988, he could have had some big early-30s seasons, too.

I don't think Francis is so highly rated based on just his offensive production. Francis is to Lemieux, as Messier is to Gretzky; that is the perfect second line centerman. Francis, like Messier, was very good defensively (as much as he scored, people might value him higher for his two way play), and again like Messier, he was wicked at face-offs. He was also a great leader.

 

[The Panther]

I don't think Francis is so highly rated based on just his offensive production. Francis is to Lemieux, as Messier is to Gretzky; that is the perfect second line centerman. Francis, like Messier, was very good defensively (as much as he scored, people might value him higher for his two way play), and again like Messier, he was wicked at face-offs. He was also a great leader.

I get your point -- though I'm not sure about the Messier analogy, as Francis wasn't a physical beast.

But your point kind of underlines mine, which is, Francis looked great for a few years on a high-scoring team playing behind (or with) Lemieux. But when Francis was right smack in his prime years, as his team's #1 guy, he wasn't nearly as impressive as Stastny.

I just think it's really hard to be the main guy who carries a team, for years on end. None of Francis's 2nd-center years are as impressive as, say, Bernie Nicholls' in 1989.

 

[VanIslander]

Was Peter Stastny greater than Dale Hawerchuk?

 

[The Panther]

Was Peter Stastny greater than Dale Hawerchuk?

For me, easily above him, yes.

 

[Batis]

I think the broader point is not to denigrate Makarov's accomplishments, which were extensive, but that the structure of the Russian league was so biased to the benefit of Makarov ('s statistics). To best illustrate that, consider a hypothetical where Makarov does something or says something that gets him blacklisted by Soviet officials, and he plays out his career at Traktor Chelyabinsk, and instead the Soviets promote Alexander Kozhevnikov or Sergei Kapustin (or any number of players that I just learned about) to replace him at CSKA. Nothing changes results-wise, CSKA still wins everything, and while those players might not have lead in PPG for 10 straight seasons, Makarov certainly doesn't put up the numbers he did playing for a Traktor team that finished bottom half of the league. I mean, look at this comparison between CSKA and Traktor in goals scored for Makarov's entire tenure in the Soviet league.

	Games	CSKA GF	GF/G	Traktor GF	GF/G	Ratio
76-77	36	220	6.111	128	3.556	1.719
77-78	36	215	5.972	130	3.611	1.654
78-79	44	277	6.295	126	2.864	2.198
79-80	44	306	6.955	139	3.159	2.201
80-81	49	299	6.102	178	3.633	1.680
81-82	47	269	5.723	198	3.536	1.619
82-83	44	261	5.932	100	2.273	2.610
83-84	44	286	6.500	103	2.341	2.777
84-85	40	221	5.525	81	2.382	2.319
85-86	40	219	5.475	87	2.175	2.517
86-87	40	223	5.575	84	2.100	2.655
87-88	44	230	5.227	126	2.864	1.825
88-89	44	224	5.091	113	2.568	1.982

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

(Traktor played more games in 81-82 [56 to 47] and less in 84-85 [34 to 40] than CSKA.)

The points where CSKA pulls players from Traktor are obvious - Makarov and Starshinov leave after 77-78, Bykov leaves after 81-82 (along with Belousov going to Japan to play). Makarov/Bykov would've been a fine foundation for a strong Traktor team to compete against CSKA in the 80s, but instead they were transferred to CSKA and Traktor left with no return on those players. That's the biggest issue I have with Soviet competition, that the best players on other teams inevitably become teammates on the strongest team, and no compensation to those other teams when the strongest team takes their players.

Let's lean into the Makarov/Bykov team a bit more - assume Traktor averages around 3.5 goals a game with them, and that Makarov scores a point on about 30-35% of those goals (I'm adjusting for the fact that he would have taken a great share of the offense than at CSKA, as well as that the Soviet league didn't really track secondaries, so this is just primary points). That translates to around 50-55 points in a 44 game season, or 45-50 points in a 40 game season. That's about 1.3 PPG compared to his 1.6 PPG playing for CSKA in that period (as a percentage of CSKA goals, Makarov's point totals fluctuated between 25 and 30%).

Are you aware of that Sergei Kapustin actually did spend 3 seasons (77/78-79/80) at CSKA Moscow in the middle of his prime and that his overall points per game average in those 3 seasons was lower than what he had averaged in his 3 last seasons before the move while playing for Krylia Sovetov and also lower than what he went on to average in his 3 first seasons at Spartak Moscow after his stint at CSKA. While Krylia Sovetov and Spartak on average both were clearly stronger teams than Traktor it still shows that playing on the stacked CSKA team did not magically make him a more productive player.

Or look at Kapustins linemate at CSKA Helmuts Balderis who just like Kapustin played 3 seasons for CSKA in the middle of his prime. During his 3 seasons at CSKA Balderis had a lower points per game average than what he had averaged during his 3 last seasons at Dinamo Riga before the move and also than what he went on to average in his first 3 seasons back in Riga after his CSKA stint. During the 3 seasons that Balderis spent at CSKA (77/78-79/80) his old team Dinamo Riga did on average finish slightly lower in the standings than what Traktor did in those seasons. Considering that Balderis managed to lead the league in scoring 2 times playing for Dinamo Riga (76/77 and 82/83) I think that the even more talented Makarov could have achieved some amazing results playing for Traktor as well. In Makarovs last season at Traktor at age 19 he was already voted the 9th best player in the Soviet Union. At that age Balderis was nowhere near being a top 10 player in the Soviet Union and only scored 23 points in 35 games in the second division. In Balderis first season in the Soviet Championship League at age 21 he scored 15 points in 25 games and his first season as a top 10 scorer in the league came the following season at age 22. Considering that Balderis then went on to be a consistent top 10 scorer and a 2-time scoring champion playing with Dinamo Riga for the majority of his prime I definitely think that the sky would be the limit for the clearly superior player Makarov even if he would be playing for Traktor. In his peak season in 76/77 Balderis scored a point on 47,4 percent of Rigas goals despite missing 1 game and in his other season leading the league in points he had a point on 33 percent of Rigas goals despite missing 9 percent of the season (4 out of the 44 games). Considering that Balderis overall in those two seasons had a point on almost 39 percent of his teams goals despite missing 6 percent of the games I think that your estimate of Makarov having a point on 30-35 percent of Traktors goals definitely is on the low side. Especially when we take into account that Balderis in his 3 seasons at CSKA only factored in on 15,8 percent (77/78), 17,3 percent (78/79) and 19.9 percent (79/80) of his teams goals which is a far, far lower percentage than what Makarov averaged throughout his prime at CSKA. To be fair Balderis had his problems at CSKA in particular with his increasingly more strained relationship with Tikhonov but even when taking that into account it is to me very clear that Makarov was the far superior player and had he played with Traktor he would most likely have factored in on a even higher percentage of his teams goals than what Balderis did at Riga.

Another example of that playing on the stacked CSKA did not magically make you a much more productive player can be found in Makarovs longtime linemate Igor Larionov who in his last season with Khimik Voskresensk scored 45 points in 43 games. In his first season with CSKA and on the Green Unit Larionov scored 53 points in 46 games and in his second season at CSKA he only scored 39 points in 44 games. So it is not as if Larionovs numbers offensively exploded upon his arrival to CSKA despite getting to play on the Green Unit from the get go.

Yet another example is Vyacheslav Bykov who in his last two seasons at Traktor aged 20 and 21 overall scored 78 points in 92 games while he in his first two seasons at CSKA aged 22 and 23 only scored at a slightly higher rate overall with 77 points in 88 games.

With all this said I do agree that the Soviet League surely would have been a more entertaining league if the talent was more fairly distributed between the teams.

 

[Vilica]

With all this said I do agree that the Soviet League surely would have been a more entertaining league if the talent was more fairly distributed between the teams.

Ya I agree with you, I wish there was more extensive video of the Soviet league, or TOI sheets or even just box scores, something to indicate how much the games were actual competition and how much they were basically high-level scrimmages. Given CSKA's average score was 6-1, how much TOI did the lower level guys get in the 3rd period/on the PP when the game was out of reach? Or did they keep running out the top lines at 5v5 and the PP just to get more practice time together?

I also don't really want to quibble with estimates of production levels, yours may be more accurate than mine, but in the end we're both just trying to assign team scoring/individual scoring based on hypotheticals. One thing I do believe you glossed over a bit in comparing player production on/off CSKA, is that most of those players were top liners on other teams and 2nd/3rd liners on CSKA - ie Bykov had points on about 20% of Traktor goals, and 14% of CSKA goals in those two season samples. He marginally increased his PPG despite most likely much less TOI/PP time simply because CSKA scored so many more goals.

Getting back to the original Stastny comparison, that secondary/primary dichotomy applies when you look at Makarov's first year in Calgary and Stastny's last year in Quebec - Makarov had 86 points in 80 games compared to Stastny's 62 points in 62 games, but Makarov garnered points on 24.7% of Calgary goals compared to Stastny's 32.4%. To be sure, that was Stastny's 10th year in Quebec and Makarov's 1st year in Calgary, but it does seem to show that you'd rather be one of the top scorers on a high scoring team rather than the top scorer on a low scoring team.

That might actually be something interesting to figure out, at what percentage above and below league average does the 2nd/3rd best scorer on a high scoring team become equivalent to the highest scorer on a low scoring team.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

discriminated is a strong word. but i do feel like when it was close and another guy with the numbers on his side would have gotten the benefit of the doubt, stastny didn’t.

in every single year of the 80s, the #2 scoring center was the second team all star except the three years it was stastny. yes trottier has a lot of positives on his side beyond scoring, even if he is trailing by eight or ten points. but does savard in 83? barry pederson in 84?

You are certainly correct that Stastny should have been the second team all-star over Savard in 1983 based strictly on the numbers. But it was very close. And Chicago went from a 72 point team to 104 point team that season. Savard came in third in Hart voting that season.

The other two times he was 2nd in scoring he lost out to Trottier, who was clearly the better overall player both seasons.