HOH Top 40 Stanley Cup Playoff Performers of All Time

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Data and Projects

The NHL releasing data during the project and in the future, hopefully by the start of the 2017-18 season, should go a long way to defining future efforts.

Talking projects, a top 40 for coaches could be very interesting.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
The NHL releasing data during the project and in the future, hopefully by the start of the 2017-18 season, should go a long way to defining future efforts.

Talking projects, a top 40 for coaches could be very interesting.

Teams, Seasons, and Coaches is probably a good three-year plan if we're addressing new categories.

In the Fall, I'm setting up a repository for voluntary top-100 lists to be published late-November and early-December.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Coaches

Teams, Seasons, and Coaches is probably a good three-year plan if we're addressing new categories.

In the Fall, I'm setting up a repository for voluntary top-100 lists to be published late-November and early-December.

Hopefully next as the way hockey is trending it is becoming more and more of a coaches game. Putting players in a position to optimize team success while buffering individual weaknesses.

Historically coaching is underappreciated, often the difference between success and failure at both levels, team and individual.

Would go a long way to answering some of the issues regarding individual performances within a team. Prerequisite to an individual project.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,778
7,804
Oblivion Express
Hopefully next as the way hockey is trending it is becoming more and more of a coaches game. Putting players in a position to optimize team success while buffering individual weaknesses.

Historically coaching is underappreciated, often the difference between success and failure at both levels, team and individual.

Would go a long way to answering some of the issues regarding individual performances within a team. Prerequisite to an individual project.

We agree on this 100%. I've long argued that coaching and goal tending is badly underrated in the All Time Draft section for years now.
 

ResilientBeast

Proud Member of the TTSAOA
Jul 1, 2012
13,902
3,557
Edmonton
We agree on this 100%. I've long argued that coaching and goal tending is badly underrated in the All Time Draft section for years now.

I don't know if it is specifically in the ATD, goaltending maybe but even then it's the most complex thing to argue for. Goalies have significant variance in performance all the time.

If your coach isn't within the top 50% you don't make it to the finals

Quantifying why coaching of all things should matter so much in a hypothetical match up between amateurs from the early 1900s and a player from the 1970s WHA boggles my mind. If your coach fits your team well and you can compensate in other areas that make sense. So many times an inferior coach with a better roster has defeated a better coach
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,778
7,804
Oblivion Express
I don't know if it is specifically in the ATD, goaltending maybe but even then it's the most complex thing to argue for. Goalies have significant variance in performance all the time.

If your coach isn't within the top 50% you don't make it to the finals

Quantifying why coaching of all things should matter so much in a hypothetical match up between amateurs from the early 1900s and a player from the 1970s WHA boggles my mind. If your coach fits your team well and you can compensate in other areas that make sense. So many times an inferior coach with a better roster has defeated a better coach

That's why Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman own a combined 17 Stanley Cups. Hap Day has 5, Al Arbour 4, Sather 4, Imlach 4, and a number of other higher end coaches have 3.

Funny how you don't have what would be considered all time inferior coaches with multiple titles. ;)
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,668
16,394
That's why Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman own a combined 17 Stanley Cups. Hap Day has 5, Al Arbour 4, Sather 4, Imlach 4, and a number of other higher end coaches have 3.

Funny how you don't have what would be considered all time inferior coaches with multiple titles. ;)

You know what?
There's at least one active Head Coach with only one Stanley Cup that I'd have a really hard time keeping out of my Top-25.

To prevent any triggering, that is NOT Dan Bylsma.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,778
7,804
Oblivion Express
Dan Bylsma is probably the worst all time SC winning coach. You don't have to worry ;)


Bowman
Blake
Arbour
Day
Imlach
Ivan
Cecil Hart
Sather
L Patrick
Jack Adams
D Irvin
Shero
Gorman
Green
Plus a handful of Russian coaches if we're going global.

That's off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting.
 

GuineaPig

Registered User
Jul 11, 2011
2,425
206
Montréal
Part of the problem inherent in ranking playoff performers is sample size. You're taking NHL careers and boiling them down to, essentially, a few Cup runs. So you end up comparing a couple dozen games vs. another couple dozen. Individual biases and preferences are naturally going to result in wildly different answers from such a limited amount of evidence to work with.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Others

Dan Bylsma is probably the worst all time SC winning coach. You don't have to worry ;)


Bowman
Blake
Arbour
Day
Imlach
Ivan
Cecil Hart
Sather
L Patrick
Jack Adams
D Irvin
Shero
Gorman
Green
Plus a handful of Russian coaches if we're going global.

That's off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more I'm forgetting.

Tom Johnson, Al McNeil.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
That is... not a great way to compare anything. No consideration for yearly scoring trends OR opposition strength. Just raw points divided by raw GP and the blind assumption that everything must be equal. And even with that, there's what, a 0.03 difference? You want to assign meaning to that?

If you want to use 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, and 2002 instead (even though I'm using the best point-per-game playoffs for all of the other players), here it is:

Top-5 Playoffs (Minimum Two Rounds)
EXCEPT for Peter Forsberg, Because Whatever


Player | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | GWG | GWA | GWP | Opp-GA | Adj PTS | Adj P/GP | Years Included
Mario Lemieux | 78 | 63 | 79 | 142 | 24 | 8 | 13 | 21 | 266.2 | 107.08 | 1.37 | 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996
Joe Sakic | 90 | 52 | 64 | 116 | 19 | 12 | 13 | 25 | 207 | 112.68 | 1.25 | 1996, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2004
Guy Lafleur | 69 | 48 | 58 | 106 | 0 | 13 | 9 | 22 | 248.2 | 85.11 | 1.23 | 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979
Peter Forsberg | 91 | 39 | 65 | 104 | 28 | 9 | 14 | 23 | 204.4 | 101.2 | 1.11 | 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002
Sidney Crosby|105|41|82|123|24|7|19|26|217.3|112.2|1.07|2008, 2009, 2010, 2016, 2017
Mike Bossy | 82 | 66 | 56 | 122 | 0 | 12 | 6 | 18 | 288.6 | 85.93 | 1.05 | 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985
Bryan Trottier | 87 | 39 | 78 | 115 | 0 | 6 | 10 | 16 | 282.4 | 83.96 | 0.97 | 1977, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983
.

These numbers do not pass the eye test, IMO. A performance vs. peers analysis shows a much bigger gap between Mario and Sakic/Forsberg; a gap that one would expect given the gap in their regular season performances and when one thinks about how dominant Mario was in his two Cups runs.

From 89 - 93, which comprises 4 of Mario's 5 top runs as noted above, his PPG of 1.92 is 73% better than the average PPG of the next best 14 scorers (less Wayne) of that time period.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...mesPlayed,gte,1&sort=points,goals,gamesPlayed

From 96 - 01, which comprises 4 of Sakic's 5 top runs as noted above, his PPG of 1.16 is 34% better than the average PPG of the next best 14 scorers of that time period.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...mesPlayed,gte,1&sort=points,goals,gamesPlayed

From 96 - 02, which comprises 4 of Forsberg's 5 top runs as noted above, his PPG of 1.18 is 38% better than the average PPG of the next best 14 scorers of that time period.

The gap between Mario and Sakic and Forsberg using this method is 29% (173/1.34)and 26% respectively vs. 10% (1.37/1.25) and 23% respectively from the method used above. I think using regular season team GAAs makes zero sense. Look no further than this year when the Preds went from being a slightly below average defensive team in the regular season to the best playoff defensive team by far thru 3 rounds before running into the Pens.
 
Last edited:

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Which is precisely why using mathematical gymnastics and years that were not close to being anything special as barometers of greatness is absurd IMHO.

I don't think dismissing 2nd round runs is completely right but I think you have to defer to the Cup runs and in an XX best runs chart where more games were played to a certain extent.

And there are certainly individual situations that have to be considered too. I really think that there is not much too choose between the Avs circa 96 to 2004 and the Pens circa 08 to 17. You have to give the nod the Pens for making it to the SCFs more than the Avs in the same way you have to give the nod to the Wings over the Avs.

I think Forsberg, Sakic and Crosby all very close as playoff performers. It's almost like a Sakic vs. Yzerman overall comparison; it comes down to personal preference.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,778
7,804
Oblivion Express
I have Crosby and Sakic very close to one another all time. Forsberg is a full notch below them.

It's an issue that's been beaten to death but that's where I stand on those 3 players in particular.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,778
7,804
Oblivion Express
I just don't see how you can look at this stat:

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...mesPlayed,gte,1&sort=points,goals,gamesPlayed

and put Forsberg a full notch below. I guess it depends on how much difference there is between a "nod" and a "notch".

Put it this way.

Crosby and Sakic are in the 15-20 range for me. Forsberg is probaby around 25.

Sakic was the leading scorer on both Avs title teams. In 96 he had an elite, all time Conn Smythe run. Between that run and the 01 title team, he had 4 OT goals, 9 game winning goals overall and 60 points total.

Forsberg was 3rd on team in scoring in 96 and he wasn't even needed to win in 2001.

THAT, is where Forsberg falls a notch below Sakic.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Put it this way.

Crosby and Sakic are in the 15-20 range for me. Forsberg is probaby around 25.

Sakic was the leading scorer on both Avs title teams. In 96 he had an elite, all time Conn Smythe run. Between that run and the 01 title team, he had 4 OT goals, 9 game winning goals overall and 60 points total.

Forsberg was 3rd on team in scoring in 96 and he wasn't even needed to win in 2001.

THAT, is where Forsberg falls a notch below Sakic.

Fair enough.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
These numbers do not pass the eye test, IMO. A performance vs. peers analysis shows a much bigger gap between Mario and Sakic/Forsberg; a gap that one would expect given the gap in their regular season performances and when one thinks about how dominant Mario was in his two Cups runs.

If you fully remove the context of who the opposition is, undoubtedly Mario Lemieux will fare better in that evaluation than he does in the other. He only played two teams in that sample you've given that were within 40 goals of the Jennings.

Mario Lemieux's Opposition GA (vs. Leader), 1989-1993
307 (218), 285 (218), 264 (211), 258 (211), 264 (211), 266 (211), 275 (207), 246 (207), 275 (207), 236 (207), 299 (230), 297 (230)

+89, +67, +53, +47, +53, +55, +68, +39, +68, +29, +69, +67

You're removing the main feature of a vs. opposition statistic - the idea that a player shooting on a good defensive team is not the same as shooting on a bad defensive team, even if they are doing so in the same playoff year. For someone who understands that a player will not produce the same if he is facing harder matchups than a teammate on a different line, I don't know why this would be a blind spot, even if you disagree with using ~80 game sample sizes to assess the defensive prowess of a team.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
If you fully remove the context of who the opposition is, undoubtedly Mario Lemieux will fare better in that evaluation than he does in the other. He only played two teams in that sample you've given that were within 40 goals of the Jennings.

Mario Lemieux's Opposition GA (vs. Leader), 1989-1993
307 (218), 285 (218), 264 (211), 258 (211), 264 (211), 266 (211), 275 (207), 246 (207), 275 (207), 236 (207), 299 (230), 297 (230)

+89, +67, +53, +47, +53, +55, +68, +39, +68, +29, +69, +67

You're removing the main feature of a vs. opposition statistic - the idea that a player shooting on a good defensive team is not the same as shooting on a bad defensive team, even if they are doing so in the same playoff year. For someone who understands that a player will not produce the same if he is facing harder matchups than a teammate on a different line, I don't know why this would be a blind spot, even if you disagree with using ~80 game sample sizes to assess the defensive prowess of a team.

From 89 to 93, the Pens played 12 series against teams that averaged an 8.5 placing in league GAA and an average conference playoff seeding of 4.75. From 96 to 02, the AVs played 21 series against teams that averaged an 8.8 placing in league GAA and an average conference playoff seeding of 4.6 or so.

The Pens faced slightly better defensive teams in their era and slightly easier overall teams. I see no reason to consider the quality of the opposition as it appears to be quite similar on a relative basis. I am sure the same applies to Crosby.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->