Would Jagr have won the Art Ross without Lemieux in 1995-96 and 2000-01?

[Felidae]

We all know Jagr was capable of winning the Art Ross without Lemieux, he did after all win the one the year before. But 1995-96 is probably a top 3 season of his career from a purely statistical perspective.

but it was preceded and followed by 3 of his "weaker" prime seasons before he peaked in 1998-99 and 1999-00, the 2 seasons he created the most separation between himself and his competition.

Without Lemieux, do you think he separates himself from the pack to the same degree and still reaches 140+ points?


As for 2000-01, this one is probably more iffy. From what I remember, he was a PPG and not in the art Ross race before Lemieux came back, though he proceeded to outproduce Lemieux in the games they played together.

So what do you think? And how would an Art Ross in 1995-96 and 2000-01 without Lemieux affect his legacy?

Click to read more...

 

[Crosby2010]

I pick that he wins in 1996 but not 2001. He also is shy of 140 in 1996. He had 149, which I figure you have to throw in the Lemieux factor for at least 10 points, but certainly not much more. Jagr was a force back then, just completely on fire. And Sakic is next at 120 and no question about it Jagr outpoints him in 1996 without Mario.

However, it is flipped in 2001. Sakic has 118 to Jagr's 121. Definitely the Lemieux factor plays a role here. 3 points is not that much and Jagr barely won the Art Ross as it was. So without Mario he loses more than those 3 points I think.

 

[MadLuke]

Before Lemieux return:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Fleury: 51 pts
Sakic: 48 pts, avs had 46 games lefts
Jagr.: 37 pts, pens had 46 games lefts

Not out of reach for Jagr but a good 11 pts lead.

In 2000 in his last 46 games, Jagr scored 63 pts, that really great, but that would push him "only" at 100 pts if he would repeat that feat.

95-96, the one that challenged him in that era was Lindros and he was usually missing games...

 

[The Panther]

I pick that he wins in 1996 but not 2001. He also is shy of 140 in 1996. He had 149, which I figure you have to throw in the Lemieux factor for at least 10 points, but certainly not much more. Jagr was a force back then, just completely on fire. And Sakic is next at 120 and no question about it Jagr outpoints him in 1996 without Mario.

However, it is flipped in 2001. Sakic has 118 to Jagr's 121. Definitely the Lemieux factor plays a role here. 3 points is not that much and Jagr barely won the Art Ross as it was. So without Mario he loses more than those 3 points I think.

This all seems correct.

The Pens probably still had a good PP without Mario in 1995-96, but Mario was the main-man. You have to figure Jagr and Francis drop 10-20 points without Mario on it. But Jagr still wins in 1995-96 (as he'd done in 1995).

 

[MadLuke]

In 95-96, if we call Sakic his biggest competition, Jagr did beat him by 33 pts at even strength, only 1 pts on the powerplay.

The year before Jagr beat sakic by 8 pts at EV and they were tie at the powerplay (look very similar to 1996)

iN 1997 Sakic did beat Jagr on the pp per 11 pts.

In 1998 Jagr did lead the league in Power play points...

All that to say, with Lemieux having the puck so much, not sure if it helped Jagr PP pts that much that year and he had a lot of room (33pts) to play with.

 

[ES]

Before Mario's first retirement, didn't he and Jagr play a lot in different lines, at least in even strength?

 

[bobholly39]

Good to see my fellow history forum voters all pretty much voted the same. I think it's a fairly straightforward choice.

He wins 1996 only, but doesn't hit 140 point.

1. 1996, he was definitely the best point producer in the world, and there's absolutely no reason to think he wouldn't win.

2. At the same time - he had 149 points in 1996. I think being teammates with Lemieux, sometimes a linemate and definitely on the powerplay, added at least 10 points to Jagr. So, he finishes below 140. Probably above 130 though.

3. 2000-2001 - Jagr's season was going nowhere until Lemieux returned. And even with Lemieux returning, he barely won the Ross by 3 points. Mario Lemieux 100% added more than 3 points to Jagr's season, so no, Jagr doesn't win. It's possible without Lemieux returning, Jagr would still turn his own season around and score a lot, but not as much as he did with Lemieux.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I guess it depends on the hypothetical. If everything remains the same except Lemieux then I think Jagr wins 95-96 but not 00-01. By 00-01 the firesale was almost complete and Jagr was in the doldrums.. I don't think he gets re-energized the way he did without Lemieux coming back to give him someone to play with..

 

[Video Nasty]

Absolutely not in 2000-2001. He was listless and going through the motions until Lemieux’s return reinvigorated him. There’s a reason Mario was runner-up in the Hart race. Mind you, I don’t blame him, but there’s no question that he finishes lower than he did. 100 points and a second place finish seems about right.

As weird as it might seem, I think Sakic’s final tally of 118 would be affected too without the return of Mario propelling Jagr—maybe bringing him down to 108-110. We saw just last season how a real duel pushes the players a little harder and pulls something extra out of them that likely wouldn’t occur otherwise.

1995-1996 is a little more mysterious, because I think he was only PPG in the games Mario missed, but I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt because he was only 23, had just won the previous Art Ross, and would go on to win the next four, or three if we take away 2000-2001. Do 30 points fall off his final total to cause him to finish behind Sakic in 1995-1996? I think it’s unlikely. He more than proved that he could score at a 1.5+ PPG clip without Mario.

I voted for yes in 1995-1996 with about 125-130 and no in 2000-2001.

What’s interesting is that in a different timeline, it’s entirely possible that Sakic goes from zero to two Art Rosses. How much higher would he rank with them?

 

[Felidae]

Before Mario's first retirement, didn't he and Jagr play a lot in different lines, at least in even strength?

Yep, nedved and Francis I think. Most of his time spent with Lemieux came on the PP which for the record, was still a lot of time considering the unusually high amount of PPs that season



Here's the points Lemieux was in on with Jagr

Mario was in on 12 of Jagr’s 95 ES points, 37 of his 51 PP points and 1 of his 3 SH points

*Edited to add missed PP point

That being said.. the post below is an interesting point worth considering regarding Jagr's PP time with Lemieux.

You can ignore the kucherov mention since this was on a Jagr 1995-96 vs Kucherov 2023-24 thread.

This is basically how I see it. Jagr at that point was arguably as good or better than Lemieux at ES, and certainly was by the following year. He had better linemates than Kucherov, but I think the Lemieux effect is overstated. For players at this caliber any edge in facing second line competition is usually negated by fewer offensive opportunities.

One thing in particular is that Lemieux dominated the PP and while he no doubt made things easier for Jagr and the rest I’m not sure if it would have led to any more points than Jagr being the catalyst like he was later in his career and Kucherov is now. Lemieux ran Zubov off the team because he was doing too much on the PP which speaks to the amount everything had to run through him.

The Pens scored 109 PP goals but Jagr only had a point on 47% of them. In contrast, in his 98-99 season, the PP was less potent overall sans Lemieux, but he had a point on 68% of the PP goals. If the 95-96 Pens had the same PP percentage as the 98-99 Pens, they would have scored 75 goals. Coincidentally, if Jagr had a point on 68% of those goals, he would have had the exact same 51 PP points.

Though I wouldn't bet on it, I don't think it's too far fetched Jagr could of hit 140 points that year without Lemieux.

Kucherov hit 140+ points and MacKinnon was close last year in similar scoring environments (less PPs though) Unless we think they were clearly better players than a 23 year old Jagr? Which I guess isn't too outlandish

 

[MadLuke]

Sakic goes from zero to two Art Rosses.

And could easily have 2 harts and Smythe's those 2 season... in that timeline.

Though I wouldn't bet on it, I don't think it's too far fetched Jagr could of hit 140 points that year without Lemieux.

He did not score a specially high amount of PP point that year (for Jagr with Francis-64 games of Zubov), 51 points that was Sakic-Selanne production...

I would too not close the door to 140 points, 127 pts in 1999 is arguably bigger than 140 pts in 1996 and his teammate as good-better.

45 pts on the PP for him that year would have been possible, that Weight with the OIlers production.