#8 - The top 15 best seasons of the Dead Puck Era (1996-97 to 2003-04)

[TheGuiminator]

Poll results

1. Jagr (1998-99)
2. Hasek (1996-97)
3. Sakic (2000-01)
4. Hasek (1997-98)
5. Hasek (1998-99)
6. Lemieux (1996-97)
7. Jagr (2000-01)
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15

Click to read more...

 

[bobholly39]

Lemieux, 2001. I've refrained from voting for it until now due to games played - but I think it's time. Yes it's only 43 games - but it's an absolutely ridiculous comeback, at age 35, to play at such a high level, after being away for so long.

He led the league in Points per game, Assists per game, and Goals per game.

His points per game was 1.767 - No one since 2001 has posted a higher ppg. The last player to post such a high one was Lemieux himself, in 1996 (Jagr also that season). Right smack in the middle of the dead puck era.

His goals per game of 0.814. Also the highest of any season since 2001, and the last player to post a higher GPG was Lemieux himself, again in 1996. (Bure did come close the season prior, with 0.784. Ovechkin's highest GPG is 0.793 in 2008).

His assists per game was 0.954. Also - best in the league. That number isn't quite as historic as the first two, but still, it's the highest total of any player in a 3 year period.

 

[Plural]

43 games is not enough in my books. Mario didn't play back to backs I think.

 

[bobholly39]

43 games is not enough in my books. Mario didn't play back to backs I think.

He played 43 of 46 games total after his return including all back to backs. He missed 2 of the final 3 games of season. Not sure why - rest before playoffs i assume, or maybe minor injury.

 

[Andrei79]

Forsberg 2003, he was a dominant force in all aspects of the game.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Lemieux, 2001. I've refrained from voting for it until now due to games played - but I think it's time. Yes it's only 43 games - but it's an absolutely ridiculous comeback, at age 35, to play at such a high level, after being away for so long.

He led the league in Points per game, Assists per game, and Goals per game.

His points per game was 1.767 - No one since 2001 has posted a higher ppg. The last player to post such a high one was Lemieux himself, in 1996 (Jagr also that season). Right smack in the middle of the dead puck era.

His goals per game of 0.814. Also the highest of any season since 2001, and the last player to post a higher GPG was Lemieux himself, again in 1996. (Bure did come close the season prior, with 0.784. Ovechkin's highest GPG is 0.793 in 2008).

His assists per game was 0.954. Also - best in the league. That number isn't quite as historic as the first two, but still, it's the highest total of any player in a 3 year period.

Fair enough, but I do think Lemieux’s 2000-01 season falls in the category of most impressive seasons and most high level of play rather than best seasons.

Don’t get me wrong, Lemieux put up the best season he could had hope for and it’s probably in the top 3 of most impressive seasons of all time, but It needs more meat on the bone. 43 games is just not enough and nobody can pull out any conclusions even with this high level of play.

I think Jagr’s 1999-2000 season is better cause while he missed a quarter of season, he still managed to win the Ross (with a significant PPG lead), the Pearson and a 1st AST selection. Not to mention that he lost the Hart to Pronger by a hair despite missing 19 games. So there’s no doubt Jagr’s winning the Hart playing a full season.

But what if Lemieux plays a full season in 00-01? Does he out-point Jagr ? It’s very possible, but let’s not forget that Jagr put up more points than Lemieux during that 43 games stretch. Does Lemieux win the Hart? It’s a long shot considering how valuable Sakic was to his team. So there’s too much uncertainties that you can’t assume Lemieux would had swept every awards, unlike Jagr in 99-00 who’s more of a certainty.

 

[wetcoast]

Lemieux, 2001. I've refrained from voting for it until now due to games played - but I think it's time. Yes it's only 43 games - but it's an absolutely ridiculous comeback, at age 35, to play at such a high level, after being away for so long.

He led the league in Points per game, Assists per game, and Goals per game.

His points per game was 1.767 - No one since 2001 has posted a higher ppg. The last player to post such a high one was Lemieux himself, in 1996 (Jagr also that season). Right smack in the middle of the dead puck era.

His goals per game of 0.814. Also the highest of any season since 2001, and the last player to post a higher GPG was Lemieux himself, again in 1996. (Bure did come close the season prior, with 0.784. Ovechkin's highest GPG is 0.793 in 2008).

His assists per game was 0.954. Also - best in the league. That number isn't quite as historic as the first two, but still, it's the highest total of any player in a 3 year period.

Sorry but 43 games isn't enough here, not even close.

Also I don't have 45 minutes to actually look up and compare all of these seasons in context and really doubt that any voter here even bothered to look up more than there favorite player and perhaps 1 or 2 others.

 

[bobholly39]

Fair enough, but I do think Lemieux’s 2000-01 season falls in the category of most impressive seasons and most high level of play rather than best seasons.

Don’t get me wrong, Lemieux put up the best season he could had hope for and it’s probably in the top 3 of most impressive seasons of all time, but It needs more meat on the bone. 43 games is just not enough and nobody can pull out any conclusions even with this high level of play.

I think Jagr’s 1999-2000 season is better cause while he missed a quarter of season, he still managed to win the Ross (with a significant PPG lead), the Pearson and a 1st AST selection. Not to mention that he lost the Hart to Pronger by a hair despite missing 19 games. So there’s no doubt Jagr’s winning the Hart playing a full season.

But what if Lemieux plays a full season in 00-01? Does he out-point Jagr ? It’s very possible, but let’s not forget that Jagr put up more points than Lemieux during that 43 games stretch. Does Lemieux win the Hart? It’s a long shot considering how valuable Sakic was to his team. So there’s too much uncertainties that you can’t assume Lemieux would had swept every awards, unlike Jagr in 99-00 who’s more of a certainty.

If Lemieux plays the full 2001 season (and assuming his pace holds up over full 82 games, or at least doesn't fall off too much) - I think he would 100% have won the hart, no questions asked. His return was a great story, and voters love great stories. As it is, he finished 2nd in hart voting with only 43 games played. Does he outpoint Jagr over full 82 games? I don't know - it's true Jagr slightly outpointed him in the 43 game stretch. Maybe? 50/50 shot imo. I feel as though both questions are kind of moot in regard to the poll question though. Both Sakic and Jagr's 2001 seasons have already been voted in. And just because Lemieux 2001 wasn't as close to the hart as Jagr 2000 was - it doesn't really mean anything. Not all hart seasons are created equal.

 

[wetcoast]

If Lemieux plays the full 2001 season (and assuming his pace holds up over full 82 games, or at least doesn't fall off too much) - I think he would 100% have won the hart, no questions asked. His return was a great story, and voters love great stories. As it is, he finished 2nd in hart voting with only 43 games played. Does he outpoint Jagr over full 82 games? I don't know - it's true Jagr slightly outpointed him in the 43 game stretch. Maybe? 50/50 shot imo. I feel as though both questions are kind of moot in regard to the poll question though. Both Sakic and Jagr's 2001 seasons have already been voted in. And just because Lemieux 2001 wasn't as close to the hart as Jagr 2000 was - it doesn't really mean anything. Not all hart seasons are created equal.

Seriously tell me how Mario deserves 2nd place for hart voting that year in 43 games played and Bure was 9th?

 

[bobholly39]

Seriously tell me how Mario deserves 2nd place for hart voting that year in 43 games played and Bure was 9th?

Well - regardless of "deserved" - I was saying he actually finished 2nd for the hart that year. Hart voters love a good story, and he had a fantastic story and made for an obvious candidate.

As to "deserved" - insomuch as the hart is about bringing value to a team - yes he 100% deserved high hart placement. Jagr was going nowhere - Lemieux came in and completely rejuvenated the team, the fan interest, the team's best player and offense - his value to the team was immense that season, both on and off the ice. Tangibles, and intangibles. I'm fine with Sakic winning, with his full season - but to say Lemieux didn't deserve hart consideration i think is false, even with less games played.

Bure only had 16 more points total in almost 40 more games played. Pretty sure his team missed playoffs too

 

[wetcoast]

Well - regardless of "deserved" - I was saying he actually finished 2nd for the hart that year. Hart voters love a good story, and he had a fantastic story and made for an obvious candidate.

As to "deserved" - insomuch as the hart is about bringing value to a team - yes he 100% deserved high hart placement. Jagr was going nowhere - Lemieux came in and completely rejuvenated the team, the fan interest, the team's best player and offense - his value to the team was immense that season, both on and off the ice. Tangibles, and intangibles. I'm fine with Sakic winning, with his full season - but to say Lemieux didn't deserve hart consideration i think is false, even with less games played.

Bure only had 16 more points total in almost 40 more games played. Pretty sure his team missed playoffs too

bure was 7th overall in NHL scoring while Mario was 5th on his own frigging team.

At the same time that Bure only had 16 more points than Mario, he also had 55 more points than the next best Florida teammate.

Heck Bure had 22 more goals than the 2nd highest guy on his team had points.

But ya Florida missed the playoffs and Mario ahd the story.........it was simply a pathetic Hart going away award vote that year.

Heck 8 voters actually had Mario first which is a real embarrassment if the voting was actually public and transparent.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

The big argument in favour of Lemieux's 2001 season is he had such a big impact on the Penguins' success. The team was 26-12-3-2 with him, an 16-16-6-1 without him. That's the difference between a 109 point pace (tied for 2nd in the conference) and an 82 point pace (out of the playoffs).

The main argument against - he missed way too much time. From 1947 to 2019 (seventy years!), Lemieux's 2001 season is the only time a skater has been a Hart finalist while missing so many games. Occasionally you get a superstar at their peak finishing as a Hart finalist while missing a quarter of the season (Jagr, Crosby, Beliveau), but this year was the one and only exception (in the sense that Lemieux missed significantly more than a quarter of the year).

 

[GreatGonzo]

I feel Jagrs 1999-00 season has to be the next best or at least in the mix for next best. No Lemieux, and He won the Art Ross with 96 points while only playing 63 games. 3rd in assists, 4th in goals, 2nd in ES goals. 2nd in goals and assists per game while leading the league with a whopping 1.52 PPG.

he was the close Hart runner up to Pronger while winning the Pearson. Which leads me to the next closest guy in the mix, Pronger. Sure injuries to guys like Jagr, Sakic, and Turgeon certainly helped, it’s incredible for a Defenseman to walk away with the Hart and Norris. He was truly dominant that year.

i feel it’s gotta be between those 2, but I’m Thinking Jagr.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

How does Jagr 00/01 get picked before Jagr 97/98 and 99/00? 01 Jagr was sulking until Lemieux came back, the other 2 seasons no Lemieux around it was just Jagr dominating.

 

[GreatGonzo]

bure was 7th overall in NHL scoring while Mario was 5th on his own frigging team.

At the same time that Bure only had 16 more points than Mario, he also had 55 more points than the next best Florida teammate.

Heck Bure had 22 more goals than the 2nd highest guy on his team had points.

But ya Florida missed the playoffs and Mario ahd the story.........it was simply a pathetic Hart going away award vote that year.

Heck 8 voters actually had Mario first which is a real embarrassment if the voting was actually public and transparent.

I agree with a lot of what your saying. Bure should have gotten way more Hart consideration, but it’s hard when your team doesn’t make the playoffs, AND Lemieux still played out of his mind.

I mean 76 points in 43 games with 35 goals is very impactful, and the Pens record with him in the line up showed this compared to being absent. But I agree, although his impact on the ice was clear, 43 games is still very small. He still had Jagr and Kovalev, with Straka having a career year. All while Bure lapped the second best on his own team by 50+ points and 40+ goals. Unfortunately playoffs has a lot of influence on how the voting turns out.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

How does Jagr 00/01 get picked before Jagr 97/98 and 99/00? 01 Jagr was sulking until Lemieux came back, the other 2 seasons no Lemieux around it was just Jagr dominating.

Agree didn't understand that myself. 00-01 I consider Jagr's weakest art ross win. He depended heavily on Lemieux to win that one, whereas his other 4 he practically won by himself.

 

[tony d]

Forsberg from 2003.

 

[bobholly39]

How does Jagr 00/01 get picked before Jagr 97/98 and 99/00? 01 Jagr was sulking until Lemieux came back, the other 2 seasons no Lemieux around it was just Jagr dominating.

Jagr's 2001 season is less impressive than the other 2 maybe - but in terms of "best", his production was much better in 2001. Of course Lemieux is the big reason why this happened - but Jagr did produce all those points and goals, and it's still a fantastic season.

Outside of Jagr's 1999 season (voted #1) - 121 points is the highest point total any player achieved from 1997 up until 2006. Jagr only had 96, and 102 points the other two seasons.

 

[Midnight Judges]

The big argument in favour of Lemieux's 2001 season is he had such a big impact on the Penguins' success. The team was 26-12-3-2 with him, an 16-16-6-1 without him. That's the difference between a 109 point pace (tied for 2nd in the conference) and an 82 point pace (out of the playoffs).

There are a lot of teams that are one superstar away from big success (like the Rangers from the 2010s). Or take Lemieux's Penguins from 1988 for example. Lemieux has one of his best seasons ever and the Pens were one of only 5 teams in the entire NHL to miss the playoffs.

Add a well-rested Jagr to that very same team half way through the season. Obviously they make the playoffs, and now Jagr - not Lemieux, and not the guys who show up every day - is the hero?

Being the guy who decides to pop in half way through the season is a bit of a luxury that few teams and few players have ever had.