HOH Top 40 Stanley Cup Playoff Performers of All Time

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by quoipourquoi, Apr 25, 2017.

  1. MXD

    MXD James St. John Smythe

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    39,178
    Likes Received:
    2,513
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Occupation:
    Dead
    See... Spontaneously, I would've thought that, production-wise, Howe and Beliveau had the two best individual playoffs ever out of anyone not named Gretzky and Lemieux.

    What I didn't expect is that the "out of anyone not named Gretzky and Lemieux" could be completely dropped. And I'm not sure I like Howe's best being THAT far ahead from Gretztky's best. Which tells me there might be something a bit off about this.

    EDIT : Wait... Did you forget to adjust the RS numbers for a 70 games season?
     
  2. Black Gold Extractor

    Black Gold Extractor Registered User

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Don't worry, I remembered the season length.

    Howe had 23 adjusted points in 11 games while Gretzky (in his final two series in 1985) had 21 adjusted points in 11 games. Explanation: Howe had a couple more lucky bounces. I think most of us accept that Howe at his very peak was pretty close to peak Gretzky. The lucky bounces just don't get to be cancelled out as often in a short stretch.
     
  3. MXD

    MXD James St. John Smythe

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    39,178
    Likes Received:
    2,513
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Occupation:
    Dead
    Okay. I get it. Howe'55 (and to a lesser extent, Beliveau'56) see a radical jump with their adjusted scoring because they played against each others teams, who were both very solid defensively. And Howes'55 opponents in the first round were also very solid defensively compared to the league's norm (teams allowing 75% of the goals allowed by "Team League Average" are usually not first round fodder, which was exactly what the Maple Leafs were).

    To give an idea of how that number is impressive, the Washington Capitals allowed 81% of the goals allowed by "Team League Average" in 16-17. To give a further idea, the historically defensively inept Colorado Avalanche, 16-17 edition, allowed 121% of the goals allowed by "Team League Average". Which is still quite a bit better than what the Chicago Black Hawks achieved in 1955.
     
  4. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
  5. daver

    daver Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2003
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    717
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Home Page:
    We can also add a few other players from that era too like Lindsay, Mikita and Geoffrion.

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

    Compare this with the 80 to 93 time period:

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

    Wayne is the obvious outlier here with Mario being the obvious 2nd (assuming Coffey is viewed as being helped by Wayne).

    Still not convinced this method is anything other than a way to potentially differentiate two players with similar peer performance resumes, and even then it would become an "arguably" type of differentiation rather than anything concrete.

    The # of games played by each player, the difference in variance in GAs from different seasons, the drop in GAs league-wide in the playoffs, and most importantly, the lack of any consideration for a team's actual playoff defensive performance make this a very sketchy metric to use for claims of "Best Playoff performer" or "Best Playoff Run"
     
  6. MXD

    MXD James St. John Smythe

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    39,178
    Likes Received:
    2,513
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Occupation:
    Dead
    To me, due to the nature of playoffs, the team defensive performance in the playoffs is too much tied to their opponent offensive performance, making it a bit tough to dissociate one with the other and not really painting how efficient they were defensively.
     
  7. Kyle McMahon

    Kyle McMahon Registered User

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,057
    Likes Received:
    218
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Occupation:
    Electrician
    Location:
    Evil Empire
    Indeed. Was Nashville incredible defensively in Round 1 this year? The numbers suggest so, but should we adjust them since they were playing the awful Blackhawks (easily the worst team in the playoffs)? This is circular logic.

    There are instances where a team's defensive or offensive prowess going into the playoffs has been significantly affected for better or worse (key late season injury or trade deadline upgrade), but for the most part the 82 game sample size is a reasonable proxy. I don't think a precise formula is necessary; quick math and mental adjustments are probably sufficient, but the alternative of just treating every opponent as equal since a precise formula has limitations is ridiculous.
     
  8. MadLuke

    MadLuke Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    2,790
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    66
    This, you cannot use the actual defensive achievement of the playoff team much (at least not in goal against), sample size of games and opposition and it is also what we are trying to achieve.

    If the oilers score 20 goal in just 4 games in round 1, we are trying to look if they did it against a good or bad defensive team we cannot use that team goal against much, how impressive the performance is, is what we are trying to achieve.

    How good they were defensively during the regular season (and I guess in previous round if the sample of games is big enough) will not be perfect, but it just need to be better than the league average to become useful.
     
  9. seventieslord

    seventieslord Student Of The Game

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    31,623
    Likes Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Location:
    Regina, SK
    Just weighing in to say I 100% agree with this and it should be obvious.
     
  10. Black Gold Extractor

    Black Gold Extractor Registered User

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    51
    I've been thinking about a possible way to refine adjustments to opponent GA. As most of us know, the proportion of team offense scored by top players has varied over time. For those who don't, this is a good overview. The causes of this include ice time (a zero-sum game for players), goaltending and defense (affects all players), and number of powerplay opportunities (affects only top players).

    In the hopes of excluding outliers, I decided to take the second and third highest-scoring forwards of each final four team and determined the percentage of offense that they participated in (i.e. player points divided by team goals for). This should allow someone performing adjustments to determine the *fraction* of opponent GA that should be allotted to first-liners. (Of course, this might be a flawed assumption for teams with two high-scoring forwards on different lines, such as Crosby and Malkin or Sakic and Forsberg. Ideally, ice time could be used, plus it would be team and player specific, but that's limited to 1998-99 onward...)

    As one could imagine, the final result was fairly noisy due to small sample sizes. A moving average was performed to determine the general trend. Unsurprisingly, the share of offense by first-liners has varied with time.

    In order to create a share of team offense adjustment without noise, I made the assumption that league-wide trends evolve gradually with time without major jumps or drops over the span of a single season. Then, I fitted the data to a 12th-order polynomial, which came back with a R-squared value of 0.47. Finally, I calculated a weighted fit combining the smooth polynomial model (R = 0.683 of the final value) and the original share of team offense results (1-R = 0.317).

    [​IMG]

    The O6 era jump puzzles me in the sense that it's the opposite of the regular season, where top forwards tended to get less of the offensive share than the post-WHA era. This indicates that either there was a change in strategy/deployment in the post-season, or there's something wrong with my methodology.

    In any case, here's are a couple of tables comparing results using quoipourquoi's method and using the moving-average fit (best 5 years, minimum of two rounds, of players). Please note that the rankings are not an all-time ranking... just the ranking of the players on this particular list.


    Rk. (bge)Rk. (qpq)PlayerGPAdj. PTS (qpq)Adj. PTS (bge)Adj. PTS/GP (qpq)Adj. PTS/GP (bge)
    11Wayne Gretzky731201221.641.67
    23Mario Lemieux781081071.391.37
    32Gordie Howe5785731.501.28
    44Jaromir Jagr6078761.301.26
    58Guy Lafleur6985841.231.22
    66Joe Sakic901131101.251.22
    79Peter Forsberg7592891.231.18
    87Maurice Richard5063561.251.13
    911Stan Mikita6477711.201.12
    1013Sidney Crosby951081051.141.10
    1110Jean Beliveau6984751.221.09
    1216Mike Bossy8286891.051.09
    1312Bobby Hull6475691.181.08
    145Bernie Geoffrion5166541.291.07
    1517Evgeni Malkin1071121091.051.02
    1620Bryan Trottier8984870.940.98
    1714Ted Lindsay5258501.120.97
    1818Patrick Kane103100990.970.96
    1919Doug Gilmour9086860.950.95
    2015Dickie Moore5054461.090.91
    Accumulated data here:

    PlayerSeas.R1 POp. GAR2 POp. GAR3 POp. GAR4 POp. GA% off. 5-yr.R1 Adj.R2 Adj.R3 Adj.R4 Adj.GPAdj. PTSAdj. P/G
    Crosby201014238522320020028.9%11.34.30.00.013161.20
    Crosby2008824761997233618429.4%6.15.75.76.120241.18
    Crosby2017719571826214722427.7%7.27.75.66.324271.11
    Crosby20098238132457226324429.6%6.39.95.82.324241.01
    Crosby201392376178018620027.5%7.66.80.00.014141.03
    Crosby2016821721935201421027.7%7.42.15.03.824180.76
    Malkin20099238102459226824429.6%7.17.67.56.124281.18
    Malkin20171119581826214422427.7%11.38.85.63.625291.17
    Malkin2013112375178018620027.5%9.35.70.00.015151.00
    Malkin2008724771995233318429.4%5.36.64.03.120190.95
    Malkin2016721721936201321027.7%6.52.16.02.923170.76
    Malkin20108238322320020028.9%6.42.60.00.01390.69
    Lemieux19921726822408268723028.3%12.41.65.86.015261.72
    Lemieux199182719264152711227328.0%5.96.711.08.723321.40
    Lemieux19961020410237723420028.1%9.78.35.90.018241.33
    Lemieux198953151429220020028.5%3.19.30.00.011121.13
    Lemieux19939292929020020027.7%6.26.20.00.011121.12
    Lemieux200172117184319520028.6%6.47.43.00.018170.93
    Gretzky1981112381026720020026.9%9.57.70.00.09171.92
    Gretzky1985533413340183061124727.2%3.07.812.09.118321.77
    Gretzky198383411432512275423226.6%4.99.09.13.616271.66
    Gretzky1988113186313132761325727.6%6.93.89.510.119301.60
    Gretzky198913314923220020028.5%8.17.60.00.011161.42
    Gretzky1993102751327110235727327.7%7.39.68.55.124301.27
    Gretzky199762015182923120028.2%5.95.47.70.015191.26
    Gretzky198663411332320020027.2%3.68.20.00.010121.18
    Gretzky198453831332210353727626.7%2.78.45.95.319221.17
    Gretzky19969252718120020028.1%7.07.60.00.013151.13
    Gretzky198715350627822811125127.1%8.84.41.59.021241.12
    Howe195520020081581218432.9%0.00.08.511.011191.77
    Howe196320020010209621131.6%0.00.08.45.011131.22
    Howe196420020011198820131.0%0.00.09.97.114171.22
    Howe19612002007206821132.4%0.00.05.86.511121.12
    Howe19562002006212615334.3%0.00.04.66.310111.09
    Howe19492002009172222029.6%0.00.09.81.711111.04
    Howe19522002004184319229.7%0.00.04.12.9870.87
    Howe19542002006153316532.2%0.00.06.73.112100.82
    Beliveau195620020092381017334.3%0.00.06.19.310151.54
    Beliveau196520020062031020630.5%0.00.05.48.813141.09
    Beliveau196920042116238516929.0%0.03.64.85.614141.00
    Beliveau19552002005220815732.9%0.00.03.88.612121.03
    Beliveau1971200821810234419329.1%0.07.08.13.920190.95
    Beliveau19542002008212215532.2%0.00.06.52.21090.87
    Beliveau196820022399246021228.5%0.01.67.10.01090.87
    Beliveau19672002005221624728.9%0.00.04.34.71090.90
    Beliveau19582002006242622733.5%0.00.04.14.41080.85
    Beliveau19662002005219522729.7%0.00.04.34.11080.83
    Beliveau195720020010266220434.7%0.00.06.01.61080.76
    Beliveau19602002003211422833.1%0.00.02.42.9850.67
    Lindsay195520020081581118432.9%0.00.08.510.111191.69
    Lindsay19522002004184319229.7%0.00.04.12.9870.87
    Lindsay19562002004212515334.3%0.00.03.05.31080.83
    Lindsay19492002005172322029.6%0.00.05.42.61180.73
    Lindsay19542002004153416532.2%0.00.04.54.21290.72
    Mikita196220020013194821131.8%0.00.011.66.612181.52
    Mikita197320092643219819329.1%0.06.52.67.915171.13
    Mikita19702007215323320028.8%0.06.32.50.0891.09
    Mikita19682009203318520028.5%0.08.63.10.011121.07
    Mikita197120082375186522729.1%0.06.45.14.218160.88
    Mikita19742003243823220028.3%0.02.46.70.01190.83
    Mikita19612002004220725232.4%0.00.03.14.71280.65
    Geoffrion195720020012266620434.7%0.00.07.24.710121.19
    Geoffrion19602002006211622833.1%0.00.04.84.4891.15
    Geoffrion19562002008238617334.3%0.00.05.45.610111.10
    Geoffrion19552002005220815732.9%0.00.03.88.612121.03
    Geoffrion19542002008212315532.2%0.00.06.53.311100.89
    Geoffrion19592002006244723532.5%0.00.04.25.11190.84
    Geoffrion19582002003242822733.5%0.00.02.05.81080.79
    Geoffrion19532002009205120131.7%0.00.07.70.91290.71
    Moore195920020012244523532.5%0.00.08.43.611121.09
    Moore195420020010212315532.2%0.00.08.13.311111.04
    Moore19602002005211522833.1%0.00.04.03.7880.96
    Moore19582002005242622733.5%0.00.03.44.41080.78
    Moore19572002006266420434.7%0.00.03.63.11070.67
    Moore19562002006238317334.3%0.00.04.12.81070.69
    Forsberg2002719012199818720029.2%7.011.58.10.020271.33
    Forsberg199981919202716820029.3%7.98.47.90.019241.28
    Forsberg20048175318320020028.4%8.93.20.00.011121.10
    Forsberg20016238822820020028.6%4.96.80.00.011121.06
    Forsberg19979210724720020028.2%8.45.60.00.014141.00
    Forsberg200042286210518420028.5%3.45.55.30.016140.89
    Forsberg19961027822204181523428.1%7.11.84.44.222170.79
    Sittler197792581221820020028.1%6.910.80.00.09181.96
    Blake194420020010285830728.4%0.00.06.85.19121.33
    Mackell195820020014220518533.5%0.00.010.54.512151.25
    Bossy198110376113356325827026.9%5.56.83.86.118221.23
    Bossy19802321424062061126026.5%1.33.56.18.816201.23
    Bossy19835290429413234432326.6%3.62.811.62.619211.08
    Bossy19857246424720020027.2%5.83.30.00.01090.91
    Bossy1982434583147354829326.5%2.45.34.15.719180.92
    Bossy1984231262327302332226.7%1.35.44.81.921130.64
    Trottier19804321112406206826026.5%2.69.66.16.421251.18
    Trottier19811037683354325727026.9%5.54.92.55.418181.02
    Trottier19826345103146354729326.5%3.66.73.55.019190.99
    Trottier1983629022948234432326.6%4.31.47.12.617150.91
    Trottier19876285725120020027.1%4.35.70.00.014100.72
    Jagr200010194617920020028.5%10.06.50.00.011171.50
    Jagr20088197721620020029.4%7.76.10.00.010141.38
    Jagr19995196723120020029.3%4.85.70.00.09111.17
    Jagr199511205420720020028.1%10.63.80.00.012141.20
    Jagr199692049237523420028.1%8.77.54.20.018201.13
    Jagr20077245424220020029.2%5.43.10.00.01090.86
    Jagr1992726872408268223028.3%5.15.75.81.721180.87
    Lafleur1977200122835198924628.1%0.08.35.07.214211.47
    Lafleur197520092601024620028.6%0.06.77.90.011151.32
    Lafleur197620052685195721428.1%0.03.75.16.413151.17
    Lafleur197820082738243522327.4%0.05.96.64.515171.14
    Lafleur1979200825812277329927.5%0.06.28.72.016171.06
    Kane2010722582225215822528.9%6.06.94.56.822241.10
    Kane2014619142061017420027.3%6.43.911.60.019221.16
    Kane2015720862017226321127.5%6.86.06.22.923220.95
    Kane2013521741965202518627.5%4.64.15.05.423190.83
    Kane200942488220224420029.6%3.06.81.50.016110.71
    Hull197120082378186922729.1%0.06.48.27.618221.23
    Hull19702009215223320028.8%0.08.11.60.08101.21
    Hull196520020013205421730.5%0.00.011.53.414151.06
    Hull19622002006194821131.8%0.00.05.46.612121.00
    Hull19612002007220725232.4%0.00.05.44.712100.85
    Hull19722005271320220029.1%0.03.52.80.0860.79
    Gilmour1994823416259426920027.5%6.912.53.00.018221.24
    Gilmour198811301627620020027.6%7.34.40.00.010121.17
    Gilmour199312273102711333220027.7%8.87.47.80.021241.14
    Gilmour1989325973435343722328.5%2.34.02.86.122150.69
    Gilmour198683138396532320027.2%5.24.13.20.019120.66
    Gilmour19847331435320020026.7%4.42.40.00.01170.61
    Sakic199611278822010181523428.1%7.87.210.94.222301.37
    Sakic1997122107247619720028.2%11.25.66.00.017231.34
    Sakic20046175618320020028.4%6.76.40.00.011131.19
    Sakic2001723822288195919528.6%5.71.77.98.921241.16
    Sakic1999121912202516820029.3%11.91.95.60.019191.02
    Richard19512002006163716229.1%0.00.06.98.111151.37
    Richard194420020010285730728.4%0.00.06.84.49111.24
    Richard195620020010238417334.3%0.00.06.73.710101.04
    Richard195820020010242522733.5%0.00.06.73.610101.03
    Richard19472002008239323527.0%0.00.06.82.61090.94
    Richard19462002006292525627.9%0.00.04.03.8980.87
    Richard19572002007266420434.7%0.00.04.23.11070.73

    Thoughts?

    P.S. Darryl Sittler has to be the greatest "small sample size player" ever.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
    quoipourquoi likes this.
  11. Canadiens1958

    Canadiens1958 Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    17,058
    Likes Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    179
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Lake Memphremagog, QC.
    O6

    O6, take it you are refering to the upward trend starting with 1954?

    A variety of reasons. Upward swing in PP performance, especially 1954-56 where a PPG did not end the penalty. 1957 onwards, PP ended with a goal against. This has to be considered, especially if more minors were called. Once the missing PPO and PPG data and penalty breakdowns are available you might have your explanation.

    Also you did not have the various coincidental penalty rules. Coincidental minors and majors produce 4 on 4 and 3 on 3 hockey until the penalties expired, so TOI gets impacted at times.Short playoff series more of a factor than over the length of the RS.

    Darryl Sittler - true, for various reasons he played very well against Bobby Clarke.
     
    Last edited by moderator Killion: Jul 22, 2017
  12. daver

    daver Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2003
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    717
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Home Page:
    I would say that assuming a player would hypothetically would not score as well as against hypothetically tougher competition, and ranking players based on this assumption, is ridiculous.

    When we are comparing a player against another player from the same era who both have played 20 to 30 rounds of hockey, you have to think there would not be a significant difference in the hypothetical defensive strength, let alone the actual defensive performances, of the teams they faced. Therefore, performance vs. peers seems to be the best way to view things.

    Look at Wayne vs. Bossy and Trottier from 80 to 88. Is there any surprise of the gap between their PPGs? Or Mario's PPG vs. the other high playoff point getters in his prime?

    Look at Forsberg and Sakic vs. Yzerman and Federov from 95 to 04. The gaps in their PPGs seems reasonable based on what they have done in the RS. And it's no surprise that Jagr has the best PPG of that group. That Jagr did not play much nearly as much as those other four past the 2nd round is significant, and is reflected in him being behind them in points. That is enough to place him behind Sakic and Forsberg as a playoff performer, IMO.
     
  13. Kyle McMahon

    Kyle McMahon Registered User

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,057
    Likes Received:
    218
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Occupation:
    Electrician
    Location:
    Evil Empire
    Strength of competition is merely one piece of the pie. It's not about hypotheticals, it's about understanding that goals scored against the 1999 Dallas Stars came under different conditions than goals scored against the 1987 LA Kings.

    Why would we speculate when all the data is readily available? Players who played predominantly in the Campbell Conference in the 80's had demonstrably weaker defensive opponents than those in the Wales Conference. Until the last couple years, the salary cap era East has been clearly weaker than the West in this regard. None of this is speculative, all the data is there. But something tells me the part about the East being weak defensively for most of a certain listed player's career is the real reason you'd prefer to just ignore strength of competition.

    Finding specific isolated comparisons that pass the so called smell test before examining them in finer detail isn't particularly enlightening.
     
  14. Black Gold Extractor

    Black Gold Extractor Registered User

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    51
    By taking the % of team offense provided by first liners during the playoffs, one can get a corrective factor that seems to take care of the performance vs. peer issues while also taking defensive ability into consideration. From my latest fit (13th-order polynomial with an R-squared value of 0.48):

    [​IMG]

    As you can see, first-liners were scoring the largest share of the pie in the O6 era.

    Best 5 years, minimum of two rounds (with results from quoipourquoi's method labeled "qpq" and my amended method labeled "bge"):

    Rk. (bge)Rk. (qpq)PlayerGPAdj. PTS (qpq)Adj. PTS (bge)Adj. PTS/GP (qpq)Adj. PTS/GP (bge)
    11Wayne Gretzky731201221.641.67
    23Mario Lemieux781081071.391.37
    32Gordie Howe5785731.501.28
    44Jaromir Jagr6078761.301.26
    58Guy Lafleur6985841.231.22
    66Joe Sakic901131101.251.22
    79Peter Forsberg7592891.231.18
    87Maurice Richard5063561.251.13
    911Stan Mikita6477711.201.12
    1013Sidney Crosby951081051.141.10
    1110Jean Beliveau6984751.221.09
    1216Mike Bossy8286891.051.09
    1312Bobby Hull6475691.181.08
    145Bernie Geoffrion5166541.291.07
    1517Evgeni Malkin1071121091.051.02
    1620Bryan Trottier8984870.940.98
    1714Ted Lindsay5258501.120.97
    1818Patrick Kane103100990.970.96
    1919Doug Gilmour9086860.950.95
    2015Dickie Moore5054461.090.91

    For example, before taking % of team offense into account, almost every O6 player of note was outperforming or performing similarly to Crosby, which doesn't make much sense since Crosby is the best offensive playoff performer in this era. After taking % of team offense into account, well I think the results make more sense.

    All other data so far:

    PlayerSeas.R1 POp. GAR2 POp. GAR3 POp. GAR4 POp. GA% off. 5-yr.R1 Adj.R2 Adj.R3 Adj.R4 Adj.GPAdj. PTSAdj. P/G
    Sidney Crosby201014238522320020028.9%11.34.30.00.013161.20
    Sidney Crosby2008824761997233618429.4%6.15.75.76.120241.18
    Sidney Crosby2017719571826214722427.7%7.27.75.66.324271.11
    Sidney Crosby20098238132457226324429.6%6.39.95.82.324241.01
    Sidney Crosby201392376178018620027.5%7.66.80.00.014141.03
    Sidney Crosby2016821721935201421027.7%7.42.15.03.824180.76
    Evgeni Malkin20099238102459226824429.6%7.17.67.56.124281.18
    Evgeni Malkin20171119581826214422427.7%11.38.85.63.625291.17
    Evgeni Malkin2013112375178018620027.5%9.35.70.00.015151.00
    Evgeni Malkin2008724771995233318429.4%5.36.64.03.120190.95
    Evgeni Malkin2016721721936201321027.7%6.52.16.02.923170.76
    Evgeni Malkin20108238322320020028.9%6.42.60.00.01390.69
    Mario Lemieux19921726822408268723028.3%12.41.65.86.015261.72
    Mario Lemieux199182719264152711227328.0%5.96.711.08.723321.40
    Mario Lemieux19961020410237723420028.1%9.78.35.90.018241.33
    Mario Lemieux198953151429220020028.5%3.19.30.00.011121.13
    Mario Lemieux19939292929020020027.7%6.26.20.00.011121.12
    Mario Lemieux200172117184319520028.6%6.47.43.00.018170.93
    Wayne Gretzky1981112381026720020026.9%9.57.70.00.09171.92
    Wayne Gretzky1985533413340183061124727.2%3.07.812.09.118321.77
    Wayne Gretzky198383411432512275423226.6%4.99.09.13.616271.66
    Wayne Gretzky1988113186313132761325727.6%6.93.89.510.119301.60
    Wayne Gretzky198913314923220020028.5%8.17.60.00.011161.42
    Wayne Gretzky1993102751327110235727327.7%7.39.68.55.124301.27
    Wayne Gretzky199762015182923120028.2%5.95.47.70.015191.26
    Wayne Gretzky198663411332320020027.2%3.68.20.00.010121.18
    Wayne Gretzky198453831332210353727626.7%2.78.45.95.319221.17
    Wayne Gretzky19969252718120020028.1%7.07.60.00.013151.13
    Wayne Gretzky198715350627822811125127.1%8.84.41.59.021241.12
    Gordie Howe195520020081581218432.9%0.00.08.511.011191.77
    Gordie Howe196320020010209621131.6%0.00.08.45.011131.22
    Gordie Howe196420020011198820131.0%0.00.09.97.114171.22
    Gordie Howe19612002007206821132.4%0.00.05.86.511121.12
    Gordie Howe19562002006212615334.3%0.00.04.66.310111.09
    Gordie Howe19492002009172222029.6%0.00.09.81.711111.04
    Gordie Howe19522002004184319229.7%0.00.04.12.9870.87
    Gordie Howe19542002006153316532.2%0.00.06.73.112100.82
    Jean Beliveau195620020092381017334.3%0.00.06.19.310151.54
    Jean Beliveau196520020062031020630.5%0.00.05.48.813141.09
    Jean Beliveau196920042116238516929.0%0.03.64.85.614141.00
    Jean Beliveau19552002005220815732.9%0.00.03.88.612121.03
    Jean Beliveau1971200821810234419329.1%0.07.08.13.920190.95
    Jean Beliveau19542002008212215532.2%0.00.06.52.21090.87
    Jean Beliveau196820022399246021228.5%0.01.67.10.01090.87
    Jean Beliveau19672002005221624728.9%0.00.04.34.71090.90
    Jean Beliveau19582002006242622733.5%0.00.04.14.41080.85
    Jean Beliveau19662002005219522729.7%0.00.04.34.11080.83
    Jean Beliveau195720020010266220434.7%0.00.06.01.61080.76
    Jean Beliveau19602002003211422833.1%0.00.02.42.9850.67
    Ted Lindsay195520020081581118432.9%0.00.08.510.111191.69
    Ted Lindsay19522002004184319229.7%0.00.04.12.9870.87
    Ted Lindsay19562002004212515334.3%0.00.03.05.31080.83
    Ted Lindsay19492002005172322029.6%0.00.05.42.61180.73
    Ted Lindsay19542002004153416532.2%0.00.04.54.21290.72
    Stan Mikita196220020013194821131.8%0.00.011.66.612181.52
    Stan Mikita197320092643219819329.1%0.06.52.67.915171.13
    Stan Mikita19702007215323320028.8%0.06.32.50.0891.09
    Stan Mikita19682009203318520028.5%0.08.63.10.011121.07
    Stan Mikita197120082375186522729.1%0.06.45.14.218160.88
    Stan Mikita19742003243823220028.3%0.02.46.70.01190.83
    Stan Mikita19612002004220725232.4%0.00.03.14.71280.65
    Bernie Geoffrion195720020012266620434.7%0.00.07.24.710121.19
    Bernie Geoffrion19602002006211622833.1%0.00.04.84.4891.15
    Bernie Geoffrion19562002008238617334.3%0.00.05.45.610111.10
    Bernie Geoffrion19552002005220815732.9%0.00.03.88.612121.03
    Bernie Geoffrion19542002008212315532.2%0.00.06.53.311100.89
    Bernie Geoffrion19592002006244723532.5%0.00.04.25.11190.84
    Bernie Geoffrion19582002003242822733.5%0.00.02.05.81080.79
    Bernie Geoffrion19532002009205120131.7%0.00.07.70.91290.71
    Dickie Moore195920020012244523532.5%0.00.08.43.611121.09
    Dickie Moore195420020010212315532.2%0.00.08.13.311111.04
    Dickie Moore19602002005211522833.1%0.00.04.03.7880.96
    Dickie Moore19582002005242622733.5%0.00.03.44.41080.78
    Dickie Moore19572002006266420434.7%0.00.03.63.11070.67
    Dickie Moore19562002006238317334.3%0.00.04.12.81070.69
    Peter Forsberg2002719012199818720029.2%7.011.58.10.020271.33
    Peter Forsberg199981919202716820029.3%7.98.47.90.019241.28
    Peter Forsberg20048175318320020028.4%8.93.20.00.011121.10
    Peter Forsberg20016238822820020028.6%4.96.80.00.011121.06
    Peter Forsberg19979210724720020028.2%8.45.60.00.014141.00
    Peter Forsberg200042286210518420028.5%3.45.55.30.016140.89
    Peter Forsberg19961027822204181523428.1%7.11.84.44.222170.79
    Darryl Sittler197792581221820020028.1%6.910.80.00.09181.96
    Toe Blake194420020010285830728.4%0.00.06.85.19121.33
    Fleming Mackell195820020014220518533.5%0.00.010.54.512151.25
    Mike Bossy198110376113356325827026.9%5.56.83.86.118221.23
    Mike Bossy19802321424062061126026.5%1.33.56.18.816201.23
    Mike Bossy19835290429413234432326.6%3.62.811.62.619211.08
    Mike Bossy19857246424720020027.2%5.83.30.00.01090.91
    Mike Bossy1982434583147354829326.5%2.45.34.15.719180.92
    Mike Bossy1984231262327302332226.7%1.35.44.81.921130.64
    Bryan Trottier19804321112406206826026.5%2.69.66.16.421251.18
    Bryan Trottier19811037683354325727026.9%5.54.92.55.418181.02
    Bryan Trottier19826345103146354729326.5%3.66.73.55.019190.99
    Bryan Trottier1983629022948234432326.6%4.31.47.12.617150.91
    Bryan Trottier19876285725120020027.1%4.35.70.00.014100.72
    Jaromir Jagr200010194617920020028.5%10.06.50.00.011171.50
    Jaromir Jagr20088197721620020029.4%7.76.10.00.010141.38
    Jaromir Jagr19995196723120020029.3%4.85.70.00.09111.17
    Jaromir Jagr199511205420720020028.1%10.63.80.00.012141.20
    Jaromir Jagr199692049237523420028.1%8.77.54.20.018201.13
    Jaromir Jagr20077245424220020029.2%5.43.10.00.01090.86
    Jaromir Jagr1992726872408268223028.3%5.15.75.81.721180.87
    Guy Lafleur1977200122835198924628.1%0.08.35.07.214211.47
    Guy Lafleur197520092601024620028.6%0.06.77.90.011151.32
    Guy Lafleur197620052685195721428.1%0.03.75.16.413151.17
    Guy Lafleur197820082738243522327.4%0.05.96.64.515171.14
    Guy Lafleur1979200825812277329927.5%0.06.28.72.016171.06
    Patrick Kane2010722582225215822528.9%6.06.94.56.822241.10
    Patrick Kane2014619142061017420027.3%6.43.911.60.019221.16
    Patrick Kane2015720862017226321127.5%6.86.06.22.923220.95
    Patrick Kane2013521741965202518627.5%4.64.15.05.423190.83
    Patrick Kane200942488220224420029.6%3.06.81.50.016110.71
    Bobby Hull197120082378186922729.1%0.06.48.27.618221.23
    Bobby Hull19702009215223320028.8%0.08.11.60.08101.21
    Bobby Hull196520020013205421730.5%0.00.011.53.414151.06
    Bobby Hull19622002006194821131.8%0.00.05.46.612121.00
    Bobby Hull19612002007220725232.4%0.00.05.44.712100.85
    Bobby Hull19722005271320220029.1%0.03.52.80.0860.79
    Doug Gilmour1994823416259426920027.5%6.912.53.00.018221.24
    Doug Gilmour198811301627620020027.6%7.34.40.00.010121.17
    Doug Gilmour199312273102711333220027.7%8.87.47.80.021241.14
    Doug Gilmour1989325973435343722328.5%2.34.02.86.122150.69
    Doug Gilmour198683138396532320027.2%5.24.13.20.019120.66
    Doug Gilmour19847331435320020026.7%4.42.40.00.01170.61
    Joe Sakic199611278822010181523428.1%7.87.210.94.222301.37
    Joe Sakic1997122107247619720028.2%11.25.66.00.017231.34
    Joe Sakic20046175618320020028.4%6.76.40.00.011131.19
    Joe Sakic2001723822288195919528.6%5.71.77.98.921241.16
    Joe Sakic1999121912202516820029.3%11.91.95.60.019191.02
    Maurice Richard19512002006163716229.1%0.00.06.98.111151.37
    Maurice Richard194420020010285730728.4%0.00.06.84.49111.24
    Maurice Richard195620020010238417334.3%0.00.06.73.710101.04
    Maurice Richard195820020010242522733.5%0.00.06.73.610101.03
    Maurice Richard19472002008239323527.0%0.00.06.82.61090.94
    Maurice Richard19462002006292525627.9%0.00.04.03.8980.87
    Maurice Richard19572002007266420434.7%0.00.04.23.11070.73
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
  15. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
    I like it, BGE. Probably aides that pesky Bossy/Trottier problem we were having.
     
  16. ImporterExporter

    ImporterExporter I troll harder than Poppy

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,099
    Likes Received:
    899
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    Oblivion Express
    That is tremendous work BGE. Thank you!
     
  17. Black Gold Extractor

    Black Gold Extractor Registered User

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Thanks, guys! In any case, I just looked into Bossy and Trottier. Here's the 5 best years compilation so far.


    Here's the data I gathered for Bossy and Trottier.


    Plus, I added Bossy and Trottier to the tables in my above post if you want to compare with everyone else.
     
  18. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
    Thanks for running those numbers on the Islanders. I didn't think the adjustment would eliminate the gap between them and some of the other players, but it's good to see some numbers for it.
     
  19. Black Gold Extractor

    Black Gold Extractor Registered User

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    561
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    51
    So, I've now also done Jagr, Lafleur, Kane, Hull, and Gilmour (plus I updated my post here if you want to compare with everyone else I've done so far).


     
  20. 10Ducky10

    10Ducky10 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2015
    Messages:
    5,405
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Trophy Points:
    128
    He played in 8 playoffs and won the cup in 6 of them and Dryden is ranked 22nd?????
     
  21. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
    Though I would have had him higher as well, he was ultimately ranked as the fourth best player of the 1970s, so landing as high as #22 is a credit to both Dryden and the quantity of top-end talent in the era.

    With a longer career at a similar level, he'd obviously make a play for much higher.
     
  22. 10Ducky10

    10Ducky10 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2015
    Messages:
    5,405
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Trophy Points:
    128
    The best money goalie I have ever seen.He was the main reason the Habs won his first cup and a huge part of the other 5 cups. Deserves to be way up the list if this is playoff performers.
     
  23. ImporterExporter

    ImporterExporter I troll harder than Poppy

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    Messages:
    10,099
    Likes Received:
    899
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Location:
    Oblivion Express
    Can somebody fix the table in the OP by chance?
     
  24. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
    Yeah, I'll update it tonight. The photos are in ranked order and the list should be on the sticky thread.
     
    ImporterExporter likes this.
  25. quoipourquoi

    quoipourquoi Goaltender

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,537
    Likes Received:
    716
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Location:
    Hockeytown, MI
    It's updated (basically). Once I'm finished rebuilding my repository of overtime scoring that was lost when the tables went away, the final column will be added: Overtime Points and Overtime Wins. And I'll probably make a big deal about it. With a parade. And balloons.

    Over the next 3 months, expect that thread, a recreation of the EvE playoff goaltending chart, and career/best-5-year opponent-adjusted playoff scoring for ~30 of the best NHL skaters. A lot of irons in the fire for playoff statistics.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"