| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
 Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:09:27
|
Here are the adjusted stats for these players. There is no doubt Crosby is impressive.
Gretzky:
First season: 81 gp, 45 g, 73 a, 118 pts
Second season: 82 gp, 45 g, 85 a, 129 pts
Lemieux:
First season: 75 gp, 36 g, 45 a, 81 pts
Second season: 81 gp, 40 g, 73 a, 113 pts
Crosby:
First season: 81 gp, 41 g, 60 a, 102 pts
Second season: 79 gp, 39 g, 83 a, 122 pts
Crosby's points per game is virtually identical to Gretzky's in year two.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
bablaboushka
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2417 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:15:21
|
| Well let's see how he does next year. I doubt he will get 92 goals like Gretzky did. I think the third year and on is where we will really get to differentiate between the two. |
 |
|
|
BigShow
Rookie
177 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:25:17
|
| Yeah, good as he is, he'll have to take things to a whole new level to match the greats. Not to say that he can't, but... 200 points is a heck of a jump ahead of the 120's. |
|
|
|
Saku Steen
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1102 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:30:30
|
| Yes they are, thats why they called him 'the next one' |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:34:22
|
| He's got another year yet before he has to hit 92 goals to keep up. Gretz's third year he had 55. But he'll have to crack the 100 assist point next year. Keep in mind he doesn't have to exactly match it as we're in a lower scoring era now. |
|
|
|
Mikhailova
PickupHockey All-Star
USA
2918 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 10:35:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
I think the third year and on is where we will really get to differentiate between the two.
Third time's the charm. I doubt Sid will put up numbers like Gretz, we'll just have to wait and see... |
|
|
|
Guest0776
( )
|
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 11:15:20
|
| your stats are wrong first season he had 39 this season he has 36 goals. |
|
|
|
bablaboushka
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2417 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 11:21:52
|
Well it depends what you mean. Gretzky's third year in the NHL, he has 92 goals and 120 assists. The year before that though, he played in the WHA.
And by adjusted do you mean by one of those weird algorithms that tries to even out the stats by era? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 12:54:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0776
your stats are wrong first season he had 39 this season he has 36 goals.
These are adjusted stats. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2007 : 13:09:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
Well it depends what you mean. Gretzky's third year in the NHL, he has 92 goals and 120 assists. The year before that though, he played in the WHA.
And by adjusted do you mean by one of those weird algorithms that tries to even out the stats by era?
I'm going with NHL as thats the league that is common to both players. Sorry my mistake on his third year stats.
Yes that's what I mean by adjusted stats. Adjusted stats are done by dividing the average goals per game of an NHL season into the all-time average of 3.055. So if this year, the average is 2.9 that means it's 94.9% as offensive as the norm. The reciprocal of this is 1.053 so all offensive totals need to be multiplied by this to compensate.
So if there was a season where the average GPG was 3.96, and there was a guy with 152 points, as a completely random example? what do his points adjust to?
152*(3.055/3.96) = 117.
- Pro-rate all stats to an 82-game schedule (i.e. multiply all the stats by 82/X where X is the number of games on the schedule that year)
- Pro-rate all stats to a league with 6.4 goals per game (i.e. multiply goals and assists by 6.4/X where X is the league-average goals per game)
- Pro-rate all assists to a league with 1.55 assists per goal (i.e. multiply assists by 1.55/X where X is the league-average assists per goal. This only has a significant effect prior to the 1950s... though it does cause the assist numbers prior to 1930 to be unreasonably high.
- Pro-rate all stats to a league with modern roster sizes (i.e. multiply stats by X/18 where X is the average number of players who play in each game). This only has a significant effect prior to the 1950s. This is also a very significant adjustment... a minor change here can turn Nels Stewart from a 500 goal scorer to a 750 goal scorer. This is based on work already done by Klein & Reif in "The Hockey Compendium", Dan Diamond in "Total Hockey" and Dary Shilling on "The Hockey Project".
Keep in mind that this is really only useful in comparing offensive numbers and not rating how good a player is. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 16:16:07
|
Here are the historic goals per game stats.
17-18 342/36 9.5
18-19 224/27 8.29
19-20 460/48 9.58
20-21 406/48 8.45
21-22 380/48 7.91
22-23 313/48 6.52
23-24 255/48 5.31
24-25 450/90 5
25-26 581/126 4.61
26-27 879/220 3.99
27-28 836/220 3.8
28-29 642/220 2.91 (YIKES)
29-30 1301/220 5.91
30-31 1054/220 4.79
31-32 957/192 4.98
32-33 983/216 4.55
33-34 1041/216 4.82
34-35 1087/216 5.04
35-36 831/192 4.33
36-37 946/192 4.92
37-38 972/192 5.06
38-39 851/168 5.06
39-40 838/168 4.98
40-41 900/168 5.35
41-42 1047/168 6.23
42-43 1083/150 7.22
43-44 1225/150 8.17
44-45 1103/150 7.35
45-46 1003/150 6.68
46-47 1138/180 6.32
47-48 1053/180 5.85
48-49 978/180 5.43
49-50 1148/210 5.47
50-51 1139/210 5.42
51-52 1090/210 5.19
52-53 1006/210 4.79
53-54 1009/210 4.80
54-55 1059/210 5.04
55-56 1064/210 5.07
56-57 1130/210 5.38
57-58 1175/210 5.59
58-59 1217/210 5.79
59-60 1238/210 5.89
60-61 1261/210 6.00
61-62 1264/210 6.02
62-63 1249/210 5.94
63-64 1166/210 5.55
64-65 1208/210 5.75
65-66 1277/210 6.08
66-67 1252/210 5.96
67-68 2476/444 5.57
68-69 2718/456 5.96
69-70 2649/456 5.80
70-71 3409/546 6.24
71-72 3348/546 6.13
72-73 4088/624 6.55
73-74 3989/624 6.39
74-75 4932/720 6.85
75-76 4913/720 6.82
76-77 4783/720 6.64
77-78 4747/720 6.59
78-79 4757/680 6.99
79-80 5902/840 7.02
80-81 6457/840 7.68
81-82 6740/840 8.02
82-83 6493/840 7.72
83-84 6627/840 7.88
84-85 6530/840 7.77
85-86 6667/840 7.93
86-87 6165/840 7.33
87-88 6237/840 7.43
88-89 6286/840 7.48
89-90 6189/840 7.36
90-91 5805/840 6.91
91-92 6123/880 6.96
92-93 7311/1008 7.25
93-94 7081/1092 6.48
94-95 3727/624 5.97
95-96 6701/1066 6.29
96-97 6216/1066 5.83
97-98 5624/1066 5.27
98-99 5830/1107 5.26
99-00 6306/1148 5.49
00-01 6780/1230 5.51
01-02 6442/1230 5.23
02-03 6527/1230 5.31
03-04 6318/1230 5.14
05-06 7588/1230 6.17 (didn't include shootout goals)
06-07 last time I checked, it was a shade under 5.8
Look at 81/82. Over 8 goals a game. Only time in history it was above 8. Wow! Note too that this was also the year that Gretzky broke out for 92 goals in his third season. I'll do some calculations and post what Crosby will have to do to keep up.
"Go chase headlights!" |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2007 : 18:40:09
|
Gretzky's actual points for 81/82 - 80 games played 92goals 120 assists 212 points. His adjusted numbers for 81/82 come out like this - 82 games played, 72 goals, 88 assists, 160 points.
To keep up with Gretz, Crosby will have to put up the following - 64 goals, 88 assists and 152 points. When these are adjusted they turn into 72 and 88 for 160 points.
88 assists seems very reachable. 64 goals is unlikely to happen. It should be fun to see what happens.
"Go chase headlights!" |
|
|
|
Leafs Rock Planet
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2007 : 15:06:37
|
Hard to believe Crosby's stats are better than Lemieux's
Always next year!! |
|
|
|
Guest5279
( )
|
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 15:36:23
|
Willus3 - its chooch:
Adjusted figures are nonsense.
Let me put it you like this - Mario was better at 16 than Gretzky was when he scored 92 "goals". I dont know if you can adjust for hanging out at centre all game waiting for breakout passes.
Can you see Sydney doing that? Nor Mario.
Both of these guys are/were all around players, but only Mario dominated every games like no other.
Youc an adjust whatever for Gretzky - stuff like that doesnt show. The most ESGA in history - dont think Crosy will break that record. |
|
|
|
Patchy
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
529 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 15:38:57
|
Crosby will have a tough time beating Gretzky's season records, but since he will probably play longer (if everything goes right) then he has a shot at beating his all time scoring record..
~~Go Leafs Go~~ |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 15:45:05
|
20 seasons, he has a long way to go...
There are: People that make things happen, people that watch things happen, and people that wonder what happened, who are you... |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 15:47:20
|
Willus where do you get the stats for the numer of players that would have played in each game?
There are: People that make things happen, people that watch things happen, and people that wonder what happened, who are you... |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 15:58:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
Willus where do you get the stats for the numer of players that would have played in each game?
There are: People that make things happen, people that watch things happen, and people that wonder what happened, who are you...
I know a guy...
"Go chase headlights!" |
|
|
|
framer87
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
338 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2007 : 17:22:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Gretzky's actual points for 81/82 - 80 games played 92goals 120 assists 212 points. His adjusted numbers for 81/82 come out like this - 82 games played, 72 goals, 88 assists, 160 points.
To keep up with Gretz, Crosby will have to put up the following - 64 goals, 88 assists and 152 points. When these are adjusted they turn into 72 and 88 for 160 points.
88 assists seems very reachable. 64 goals is unlikely to happen. It should be fun to see what happens.
"Go chase headlights!"
I think that Crosby could put up enough assists to keep up with Gretz but will lose to him when it comes to goals. |
|
|
|
Guest9938
( )
|
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 22:05:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by framer87
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Gretzky's actual points for 81/82 - 80 games played 92goals 120 assists 212 points. His adjusted numbers for 81/82 come out like this - 82 games played, 72 goals, 88 assists, 160 points.
To keep up with Gretz, Crosby will have to put up the following - 64 goals, 88 assists and 152 points. When these are adjusted they turn into 72 and 88 for 160 points.
88 assists seems very reachable. 64 goals is unlikely to happen. It should be fun to see what happens.
"Go chase headlights!"
I think that Crosby could put up enough assists to keep up with Gretz but will lose to him when it comes to goals.
I don't know.... Crosby will have to have to AVERAGE over 130 assists a season for 15 seasons to break Gretzky's career assist record. To break Gretzky's points record, he'll have to AVERAGE over 190 points per season for 15 seasons! Wow. |
|
|
|
Guest9938
( )
|
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 22:12:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5279
Willus3 - its chooch:
Adjusted figures are nonsense.
Let me put it you like this - Mario was better at 16 than Gretzky was when he scored 92 "goals". I dont know if you can adjust for hanging out at centre all game waiting for breakout passes.
Can you see Sydney doing that? Nor Mario.
Both of these guys are/were all around players, but only Mario dominated every games like no other.
Youc an adjust whatever for Gretzky - stuff like that doesnt show. The most ESGA in history - dont think Crosy will break that record.
You're trying to say that Mario never hung out at centre waiting for breakout passes? Now that's amusing.
It's amazing how people scamper around the obvious when it comes to Gretzky. Even if you don't like the guy, 61 records is something that you better not try and argue against unless you are in the mood for ridicule. That's more records than probably every other player has in all team sports combined! Yes, a little bit of hyperbole, but Gretzky's staggering numbers demand it. |
|
|
|
ED11
Rookie
Canada
224 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2007 : 23:20:12
|
| I don't think that it is right, or even reasonable, if anyone says that Crosby will beat or tie or even (in my mind) jump into second place on the all time point list. If he did that, that would be an AMAZING thing to do. Don't anyone get me wrong here, I really like Crosby, he's sensational, and even Gretzky himself said that 200 points in a season isn't a "stretch", as he put it, for Crosby. But I think that the 200 point mark won't be touched for a long long long time. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 21:27:53
|
Guest 9938 says,
"It's amazing how people scamper around the obvious when it comes to Gretzky. Even if you don't like the guy, 61 records is something that you better not try and argue against unless you are in the mood for ridicule."
Yeah, sure, I'm in the mood for a little ridicule. I find the records very impressive, yes, but I definitely DO argue against them being the be all and end all of discussions about Gretzky. When I hear a comment like the above, I get that, "Don't even think about challenging Gretzky's claim to the throne of all-time supremacy" vibe again. I hope you are just making such a comment in this thread cause the topic here is statistics, and you're saying to argue against Gretzky's statistical supremacy is crazy. If so, okay, I can maybe buy into your point, though even then I think Willus's analysis is interesting. But if you are saying more than that, then I have to ask you, is that the way you want the really young guys on this site to think? Do you really want to just say to them, "Look at 61 records - it's obvious - don't even think about anything else"?
|
Edited by - andyhack on 04/16/2007 21:32:12 |
|
|
|
Guest9995
( )
|
Posted - 04/16/2007 : 22:36:20
|
EDIT:
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Guest 9938 says,
"It's amazing how people scamper around the obvious when it comes to Gretzky. Even if you don't like the guy, 61 records is something that you better not try and argue against unless you are in the mood for ridicule."
Yeah, sure, I'm in the mood for a little ridicule. I find the records very impressive, yes, but I definitely DO argue against them being the be all and end all of discussions about Gretzky. When I hear a comment like the above, I get that, "Don't even think about challenging Gretzky's claim to the throne of all-time supremacy" vibe again. I hope you are just making such a comment in this thread cause the topic here is statistics, and you're saying to argue against Gretzky's statistical supremacy is crazy. If so, okay, I can maybe buy into your point, though even then I think Willus's analysis is interesting. But if you are saying more than that, then I have to ask you, is that the way you want the really young guys on this site to think? Do you really want to just say to them, "Look at 61 records - it's obvious - don't even think about anything else"?
I'm sorry, but I guess you can look at my post as somewhat reactionary - the antithesis, if you will - to the rediculous claims put forth by some of the posters, Chooch is by far the most obvious example. I sometimes wonder what else Gretzky could possibly have done to get his due recognition...I mean, what do people want? 5000 points? 300 point seasons? 150 goals? What else could Gretzky have done? 61 records just aren't enough for some people, apparently. Gretzky was an offensive player, not a defensive forward. He should be judged accordingly. Every player has their role. Gretzky was better in his role than any other player was in their role. And, yes, offence is judged on statistics. This is why I say it's amusing how people dismiss the stagaring numbers as 'luck' and 'empty net goals', etc. Why not mention the fact that Gretzky made empty net goals look so easy? If they are so easy to get, why can't most of the top scorers get one every time their team is up by a goal late in the game? How was it that Gretzky could repeatedly get them with uncanny certainty? I suppose it surprises me that the answer to this question isn't so obvious to many people.
I remember seeing Gretzky score some of the most amazing empty net goals I've ever seen.... For instance, one night when playing for LA, he's got the puck deep in his own end. He spins around, avoiding a check, puck on a string, head down, not even looking toward the other end of the ice where the empty net lay waiting hungry. The puck was lifted with a wrister that seemed to be throwing it into the far glass, or even in the stands, behind the opposite goal....yet, somehow, Gretzky's end to end wrister sinks at the last second, right in the top corner. I've never seen that before. That's Wayne Gretzky for you.
Or how about game 1 of the 93 Stanley Cup Finals against Montreal, when, after 'toying' with them (as Jaque Demers would say after the game) and scoring 3 assists, Gretzky charges in to retrieve the puck which had just bounced in off the back boards by the corner. With his head down, not even looking at the net, Gretzky somehow shot the puck from the goal line right in between the vacated Patrick Roy's goal posts with an ease that even scoffed at deliberation. The camera angle showcased another amazing empty net goal for all of CBC's Hockey Night in Canada to ponder. Millimeters between each post. At the goal line. 4 points, game 1.
Then there was that night against the Chicago Blackhawks while playing for the Edmonton Oilers. Gretzky had a 44 game point scoring streak on the line, yet with less than a minute left, he was still at 0 for the night. Looked like the Blackhawks had stopped him cold at game 44. The fans were cheering about it, despite the fact they were about to lose the game. Then the Blackhawks pulled the goalie, and the fans began to boo. What happened next was almost miraculous, yet completely deliberate. Gretzky charged in to pressure the Chicago defender who had the puck. The defender shot a pass up the ice, 3 feet high. Gretzky somehow knocked the puck out of the air with the shaft of his stick and batted it down with his glove, all in one motion...the defender scampering after him in the usual helpless fashion. He was in clear, and backhanded in one of the most spectacular empty net goals I'd ever seen. 45 games. The streak lives on. He finished the streak at game 51 and couldn't play again for about 2 weeks. He scored 153 points over that streak! Three points a game for 51 games. Unreal. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 04/17/2007 : 06:08:18
|
I see. Well, with respect to the empty net issue, those points you make about his ability to get empty net goals, whether one agrees or disagrees with you, to me they are a lot more effective than just listing numbers and records.
Also, you say,
"I mean, what do people want? 5000 points? 300 point seasons? 150 goals? What else could Gretzky have done? 61 records just aren't enough for some people, apparently. Gretzky was an offensive player, not a defensive forward. He should be judged accordingly. Every player has their role. Gretzky was better in his role than any other player was in their role."
Probably we should be back in the greatest player ever thread, but I think your comment in the last sentence in particular is highly debatable. My main point here is that what some of "us" on the other side want is to have that debate without being subjected to this sort of, "We must conclude based on the numbers, just as the sun rises every day, that Gretzky was better in his role than any other player was in their role" way of thinking.
There have been lots of good points made on thise site by Gretzky guys, by you too now, using comments and stories on Gretzky's vision, elusiveness, intelligence, etc. to support their arguments. I know you are reacting to Chooch but maybe you serve yourself better, even then, and even where the thread is about statistics like this one, by primarily sticking to those sort of comments and stories rather than throwing the numbers at us again and suggesting we are crazy for wanting any more than those numbers. |
Edited by - andyhack on 04/17/2007 06:23:42 |
|
|
|
fly4apuckguy
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
834 Posts |
Posted - 04/25/2007 : 21:52:39
|
I would argue that 122 points in today's NHL is better than 129 in 1980. However, Crosby is a victim of the time he is playing in - great goaltending, better defence, stronger coaching and systems.
215 points in a season will never be done again, unless:
A) John Tavares blossoms like we think he might and plays on a line with Crosby while both in their prime.
B) They make the nets a lot bigger. Not a little - a lot.
C) They start awarding two points for goals.
D) Paul Coffey, Messier and Glenn Anderson invent a time machine and join the Penguins as 23 year-olds.
I have a better chance of scoring 50 goals in the NHL than any of those things happening.
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. - Gretz |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Crosby/Lemieux/Gretzky 
