murray said:
I disagree with the bonus points of your formula as it does favor players such as Gretzky & Esposito who may have won scoring championships by large margins in some years but this is largely due to their supporting casts and the style of play of those teams. No way Esposito would have had those stats without Orr.
Also if Orr & Hull had as many NHL seasons as those guys, they likely would have had 5 or 6 (at Least) more seasons in in the top 5. Your list should really be Titled Top "NHL" scorers who played for a long time & had a few dominant seasons. Do you really think that Gretzy & Esposito would have been so dominant if they were playing in the original 6 with Orr, Hull, & Howe at their prime. Nice attempt but your logic is faulty.
Sorry Murray, we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
You overestimate the influence that teammates have on a players numbers. Take a look at Gretzky's first and second seasons on a horrible team. He was tremendous with or without great players around him. Same with Esposito in Chicago. He was becoming a star whether Orr would have been on his team or not. If their supporting casts were the reason for their huge numbers, someone in the supporting cast would have been close to them in points. The reason players like Gretzky and Espo were so far ahead of anyone else on their team and in the league is because they were PHENOMENAL players.
The bottom line is, players EARN their points. They have to make the passes, they have to score the goals. It is wrong to say "it was just because of their teammates". If that were true, no statistics are of any value. All players are a product of their teams. I completely disagree with that notion.
Having a shorter NHL career is sad but, it is life. Who in this world gets paid for work they don't do? If a player puts up the numbers, they get recognized, if a player doesn't he doesn't. Why not just give out the Stanley Cup for 2005 to the team that "should have" won it? Of course, that is foolishness. We don't give "phantom" awards. If you don't play, that is tough.
This is not a "who was the most talented player at his peak" list. It is a list of greatest scoring careers.
The argument that the original six was too tough for players like Gretzky or Esposito is very weak. Hockey is hockey, the NHL is the NHL. There have been tough players in every era and the greats always dominate.
Don't let your bias against Gretzky and Esposito skew your view of their place in history. They are two of the greatest scorers ever and THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN DOMINANT IN ANY ERA. Just like Howe, Orr, Richard and Hull.