How many points would Wayne Gretzky and/or Mario Lemieux score in today's NHL?

[Laineux]

How would Isaac Newton fare in a modern exam for 1st year physics majors?

... this question is absurd. Were you to transport Gretzky from 1980's to 2015 and put him straight into the NHL, there would be no chance at all that he would even remotely contend for the Art Ross. 0% chance. Impossible.

 

[The Panther]

How would Isaac Newton fare in a modern exam for 1st year physics majors?

... this question is absurd.

Correct. I will never understand these kinds of threads.

Were you to transport Gretzky from 1980's to 2015 and put him straight into the NHL, there would be no chance at all that he would even remotely contend for the Art Ross. 0% chance. Impossible.

Okay... but then how do you explain this:

- The Gretzky in 1981 is physically the same Gretzky who scored 163 points in 1991, the same season Jagr scored 57 points. Less than two years ago, Jagr scored 67 points and I noticed he got two goals the other night. So, if old Jagr got 67 points and young Jagr got 57 points playing against Gretzky who had 163, how in the world do you figure that Gretzky transported to today would have a "0%", "impossible" chance of competing for a 90-point scoring title???

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

How would Isaac Newton fare in a modern exam for 1st year physics majors?

... this question is absurd. Were you to transport Gretzky from 1980's to 2015 and put him straight into the NHL, there would be no chance at all that he would even remotely contend for the Art Ross. 0% chance. Impossible.

IMO, any reasonable reading of the question assumes the players being talked were born at a time when they would then be in their primes now, and therefore have all the benefits of today.

Though personally, while I think the time machine way of looking at things is pretty dumb, I think a time machined Gretzky at least competes for Art Rosses. I mean, Ray Bourque was able to a 1st Team All Star in both 1980 and 2001. 2001, the same year Jaromir Jagr (still an effective player even though he's one of the slowest players in the league at this point) was already at the tail end of his peak.

 

[shazariahl]

So you believe the NHL of today is easier to dominate than the NHL of the 80's? Because a 174 point season today would literally be double what the highest scorer got last year, Gretzky never even had close to that type of dominance in the 80's so why on earth would he today? Best case scenario is Gretzky would score 130, and that's only if you believe he would be as good relative to today's players as he was to the players of the 80's, which I really don't think he would be for a number of reasons.

Well, if you consider nearly 80% margin of victory to be "close" to 100%, then he actually did come close. But even if we figure he "only" scores 130 pts last year, as you indicate, that's a ridiculous level of dominance, when no one else even breaks 90.

That's a massive understatement. Make no mistake about it, if we took Gretzky from his prime in the 80's exactly as he was with the same equipment, he wouldn't even crack an NHL roster. That's not just my opinion, it's the truth.

If he grew up with today's advantages he could have been anywhere from a mediocre 2nd line center to a 130 point player, no one knows for sure.

Considering we have plenty of examples of players adapting to changes in the game over the course of their careers, including Gretzky himself, I see no reason to think he'd be incapable of adjusting. If taken say at 18, when starting his career, I agree he probably doesn't mature and dominate right from the 1st season, the way he did in real life. But that's a pretty unfair comparison. I mean, if you are using a time machine, there's no reason you couldn't just go back further in time, grab him when he's like 6, and give him 12 years to adjust. Or whatever. Which is why those types of analysis are stupid, IMO. If you are trying to handicap him, you can do so. If the purpose is to see "how good would he be if he played today", which I assume is the whole point of this, then I would want him to have every advantage modern players do, so I can actually see how good he would be in today's NHL.

Also, if he did grow up in today's NHL, there's no reason to think he'd be a mediocre 2nd line center. He wasn't even a mediocre 2nd line center 18 and 19 years into his career with an arthritic shoulder and a back back, so it's hard to imagine he'd suddenly be way worse playing in his prime in a league with no obstruction, compared to the end of his career during the dead puck era. Unless you have some specific reason why he'd be way worse, despite not being old and injured?

Prime Gretzky using early 80's skates and a wooden Titan in today's NHL probably isn't as good as what we've seen out of Crosby at his best

If Prime Gretzky had been the beneficiary of today's training methods and better equipment... then it's anybody's guess

If Gretzky was playing today, why would we make him use early 80's skates and a wooden Titan? Is everyone else in today's league going to use 80's gear? I thought the purpose was to see how he'd do in TODAY's NHL, not to see how Gretzky would do if we totally handicapped him. Why not make him play with his hands tied behind his back, or force him to skate with a piano on his back while we're at it?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lemieux hits 140-160 in his prime

 

[BenchBrawl]

How would Isaac Newton fare in a modern exam for 1st year physics majors?

He would be the best in his math/physics class and would easily become a very strong physicist.

I just don't see 180 points as realistic in today's NHL, where the next best scorer would have only 87 points. Gretzky never actually doubled second place or even came that close - the closest he came was 183-108 in 1987:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/sh....php?t=1537825

Right, my predictions were a bit optimistic, I tend to change them often.

Say GP-G-A-PTS

Lemieux: 70-63-82-145
Gretzky: 80-51-110-161

I'm extremely confident that Lemieux would score 60 goals if he played 70 games and Gretzky would score 100 assists if he played anything more than 75 games.

The problem is Lemieux' assists numbers and Gretzky's goalscoring numbers.

 

[Czech Your Math]

I believe that the difficulty scoring points is reflected well in the league GPG, although the lack of PPs does hurt stars who tend to score relatively more points on the PP.

One thing that belies this supposed difficulty is the performance of some of the older star forwards over the past several years:

Sedins- Daniel's career high in PPG was at age 29 ('10) and his career highs in goals & points were when he won the Ross at age 30 ('11). Henrik's two best seasons in points were at ages 29 & 30, when he won the Ross in '10 and finished 4th in '11. Daniel's 76 & Henrik's 73 points in '15, at age 34, were good for 8th & 10th.

St. Louis- Obviously a late bloomer, but still... set career highs in goals & points at age 31 in '07 (5th in each)... two of his other 4 best point seasons were at ages 34 & 35 in '10 & '11 (was 6th & 2nd)... won the Ross, with career highs in PPG and adj. points at age 37 in '13.

Iginla- Won the Richard & Ross w/ 52G & 96P in '02 at age 24. His next best goal seasons were at age 30 & 33 ('08 & '11). His career high in points were at 30 ('08) and the other of his best 5 point seasons were at 29, 31, and 33 ('07, '09 & '11). The last two seasons, he's still averaged 60 points at ages 36 & 37.

Hossa- Topped 60 points each of the past two seasons at ages 34-36.

Sharp- Set a career high in points in '14 at age 32.

Datsyuk- His two best seasons were at ages 29 & 30 in '08 & '09. He continues to be consistently ~PPG into his mid-30s.

Zetterberg- Two of his top 3 adjusted point seasons were at ages 30 & 32 ('11 & '13) and he continues to be ~PPG in his early-mid-30s.

Players who were 30+ before end of regular season that finished top 15 in points [or PPG in brackets] since '93 (only time in top 15 at age 30+ is bolded):

1993: 3 Oates (30)... [12 Gretzky (32)]
1994: 1 Gretzky (33), 3 Oates (31), 4 Gilmour (30), t9 Andreychuk (30), t15 Francis (30)... [12 Bourque (33)]
1995: 5 Francis (31), t6 Coffey (33), t10 Messier (34), t10 Oates (32), t12 Nicholls (33), t14 Hull (30)
1996: 1 Lemeiux (30), 4 Francis (32), 12 Gretzky (35), t13 Messier (35)... [12 Oates (33)]
1997: 1 Lemieux (31), t4 Gretzky (36), t8 Francis (33), t13 Yzerman (31), 15 Messier (36)
1998: t3 Gretzky (37), t5 Francis (34), t11 Bondra (30), 13 Oates (35), t14 Recchi (30)... [9 Hull (33)]
1999: t7 Fleury (30)
2000: 3 Recchi (31), t8 Sakic (30), 10 Yzerman (34), t11 Roenick (30), t11 Shanahan (31), 13 LeClair (30)... [3 Turgeon (30), 12 Robitaille (33)]
2001: 2 Sakic (31), 7 Bure (30), 8 Weight (30), t11 Robitaille (34), 13 Guerin (30), 14 Modano (30), 15 Mogilny (31)... [1 Lemieux (35), 7 Fleury (32), 12 Recchi (33)]
2002: 4 Sundin (30), t5 Jagr (30), t5 Sakic (30), t7 Oates (39), t9 Francis (38), t9 Modano (31), t12 Conroy (30), t12 Shanahan (33), t12 Tkachuk (30)... [8 Bure (31)]
2003: 7 Murray (30), 8 Lemieux (37), t10 Modano (32), t10 Palffy (30), 12 Fedorov (33), t15 Mogilny (33)... [14 Jagr (31), t15 Alfredsson (30), t15 Sakic (33)]
2004: t2 Sakic (34), 4 Naslund (30), t7 Aldredsson (31), t7 Stillman (30), t9 Lang (33), t12 Recchi (36), t12 Sundin (32), 15 Jagr (32)... [1 Forsberg (30)]
2006: 2 Jagr (34), t4 Alfredsson (33), t13 Selanne (35)... [9 Forsberg (32)]
2007: 5 St. Louis (31), t6 Sakic (37), t8 Jagr (35), t11 Selanne (36), t14 Alfredsson (34)
2008: 3 Iginla (30), 9 Alfredsson (35), 11 Kovalev (34), t12 St. Louis (32)
2009: 4 Datsyuk (30), 8 Iginla (31), t9 M. Savard (31)
2010: 6 St. Louis (34), 8 Thornton (30), 14 Marleau (30)
2011: 1 D. Sedin (30), 2 St. Louis (35), 4 H. Sedin (30), 6 Iginla (33), t8 Selanne (40), t8 Zetterberg (30), 10 B. Richards (30)... [11 Datsyuk (32)]
2012: t7 H. Sedin (31), t10 Elias (35), t12 Hossa (33), t12 Thornton (32), t12 Whitney (39)
2013: 1 St. Louis (37), t7 Kunitz (33), t10 Datsyuk (34), t10 Ribeiro (32), t13 Zetterberg (32)
2014: 12 Sharp (32), 13 Thornton (34)
2015: t8 Hudler (31), t8 D. Sedin (34), t10 H. Sedin (34)... [6 Datsyuk (36)]

Now it's interesting to compare the seasons thru '99 or '00 with some of the later years. One can make some sort of decent HHOF argument for just about anyone who appears until about '03. Then in '03 & '04, we have the likes of Murray, Lang, and Stillman... obviously not even close to HHOF. The past few seasons have seen the likes of Whitney, Kunitz, Ribeiro, Sharp, and Hudler. None of these guys is going to incite protests when excluded from HHOF.

When you look at the combination of how high these age 30+ players finished, how old they were, and how good they were, it gives you some idea of the competition. The past 5 seasons don't appear especially difficult in this regard:

2011- St. Louis 2nd at age 35... Selanne 8th at age 40?
2012- Elias (35), Hossa (33), and Whitney (39!) making their only appearances in the top 15???
2013- St. Louis wins the Ross at age 37!?!
2015- Hudler (sole appearance) and both Sedins (age 34) in top 10??

Also, somehow we're supposed to believe the NHL has virtually impenetrable systems and the competition is way beyond that of 20 years ago... yet a 31 y/o Jiri Hudler led the NHL in ES points and an undrafted Tyler Johnson tied for third. Yeah, no... not gonna buy that for a dollar!

 

[daver]

I believe that the difficulty scoring points is reflected well in the league GPG, although the lack of PPs does hurt stars who tend to score relatively more points on the PP.

Unless a player only scores at ES, and there aren't any, the lack of PPs hurts every elite offensive player. This is the major factor, if not the only factor, why scoring by the Art Ross leaders is lower compared to years in the DPE where overall league scoring was at a similar rate. If you compare 2000/01 to 2013/14, you will see the average PPG of the Top Ten scorers is lower by the lower amount of scoring on the PP by the Top Ten scorers. When scoring levels by the elite gets more packed together it introduces parity, where seemingly less than elite players can make their way into the top echelon.

Frankly introducing the "well so and so wouldn't have finished in the Top Ten in the '90s" is an extremely weak argument and adds zero to a discussion on an interesting topic.

 

[daver]

I actually ran the math for this a while back - took Gretzky's margin of victory over 2-10 players and applied it to all post-lockout years: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=105664913&highlight=#post105664913

Conclusion - "Peak" Gretzky margins of victory will net you 185 highest (05-06), 142 lowest (14-15)

Reposting from here, minor edits for context
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/sh...#post102392729

Repost:

This is a test of Gretzky's margin of victory over players 2 to 10 (basically top 10 players). Then, we apply it to the top 2-10 players every year since the lock-up.
The reason I looked into this is, is that this methodology takes away from "freak years" where the #2 person in the league does exceptionally well, thus skewing your base number.


Gretzky's "Peak" margin of victory over top scorers 2-10 (1986-87): 79.8%
The average top 2-10 point totals that year is 101.8

Gretzky's "Prime" margin of victory over top scorers 2-10 (1982-87): 78.3%
The average top 2-10 point totals for those years are 113

So if we apply that same margin of victory against the top 2-10s since the lockout. Reversed Order:

2014/2015 = 142 Peak, 141 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 79
2013/2014 = 147 Peak, 146 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 82
2012/2013 (pro-rated) = 162 Peak, 162 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 91 (pro-rated)
2011/2012 = 152 Peak, 151 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 84
2010/2011 = 158 Peak, 157 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 88
2009/2010 = 172 Peak, 171 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 96
2008/2009 = 170 Peak, 169 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 95
2007/2008 = 170 Peak, 168 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 94
2006/2007 = 183 Peak, 182 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 102
2005/2006 = 185 Peak, 183 Prime, Top 2-10 Average: 103

Source is hockey reference.

The reason why the math uses the average points of 2-10 is to make sure Gretzky isn't competing against himself.

Prime margin of victory is just the average of all his margins of victory from 82 to 87, all weighted equally. Probably not perfect math.

I think the person who made a point about ice time is legit though - that will have a factor into Gretzky's point totals.

This is the right method but I think it makes sense to measure the % difference in the PPG of the leader vs. the average PPG of the next 10 to 20 scorers. This eliminates an injury factors while assuming any Top Ten scorer would have kept up their PPG if they played a full season.

This makes translating the % advantage into any other season more accurate. I.E. If you took your % and put it into 2014/15, it is 82 game Wayne vs. a 77 game Crosby and a 71 game Seguin.

 

[daver]

Rather than getting bogged down in a discussion about numbers, the mind-numbing concept of time travel, and the unprovable theory that the current talent level is either lower or higher than that of the '80s and '90s, I think there are some interesting points of discussion surrounding how would the two best offensive players of all-time do in a league that seems to be heading towards historically low scoring figures by the elite forwards:

Would Wayne and Mario cause a systematic change from defensive-minded strategies and open things up? The drop in scoring in the '90s when offensive hockey seemed to be at its peak would indicate if there was, it may only be temporarily.

Does a lower scoring environment for elite forwards, and in the league in general, lower the relative dominance of generational talents. Would Wayne and Mario still be 60% - 70% ahead of everyone else? Maybe 50% is more reasonable.

 

[BenchBrawl]

IMO, any reasonable reading of the question assumes the players being talked were born at a time when they would then be in their primes now, and therefore have all the benefits of today.

Though personally, while I think the time machine way of looking at things is pretty dumb, I think a time machined Gretzky at least competes for Art Rosses. I mean, Ray Bourque was able to a 1st Team All Star in both 1980 and 2001. 2001, the same year Jaromir Jagr (still an effective player even though he's one of the slowest players in the league at this point) was already at the tail end of his peak.

How better can the ''benefit of today'' makes you as a top player compared to the 80s? I assume Gretzky, once transported in the time-machine, would start to train with modern equipment, wear modern equipment and eat what athletes eat today, so maybe a year of adjustment but you would already see whatever difference it can really make, even if at 17 he would still be in the late-70s and magically appear at 20-21 in today's NHL.

I was always suspicious of all these factors in boosting a hockey player to any significant level though.It is my understanding that many players today are not taking their health as seriously as people think.It's case by case.And as a growing up regimen, I would take Walter Gretzky's methods of studying the game over better nutrition and training equipment.

A guy like Lafleur had a superior training method and natural giftedness/athleticism (slow heartbeat) than 95% of today's players.He was working much harder at getting better, always the first at the rink in the morning and so on.That's more important than better food or training gear.There was a video of Lafleur (which I can't find no more) with 10 pucks in front him along the board slapshotting every single one of them in the absolute outside top corner of the net in his 40s as he was training for a old-timer games tour.Many players today don't have that technic at all.It was impressive to see, the shots were strong as well for an old man.

 

[bobholly39]

Unless a player only scores at ES, and there aren't any, the lack of PPs hurts every elite offensive player. This is the major factor, if not the only factor, why scoring by the Art Ross leaders is lower compared to years in the DPE where overall league scoring was at a similar rate. If you compare 2000/01 to 2013/14, you will see the average PPG of the Top Ten scorers is lower by the lower amount of scoring on the PP by the Top Ten scorers. When scoring levels by the elite gets more packed together it introduces parity, where seemingly less than elite players can make their way into the top echelon.

Frankly introducing the "well so and so wouldn't have finished in the Top Ten in the '90s" is an extremely weak argument and adds zero to a discussion on an interesting topic.

Speaking of Power Plays in today's league.

I think even Pittsburgh, a team with Crosby and Malkin, play a defensive style game today.

I don't think a team with Gretzky or Lemieux would. And that's the major difference. I think both are so dominant offensively that there wouldn't be restrains on them.

As a result, they would score more, and also generate a lot more power play opportunities.

Looking at the league last season exactly as it was and trying to insert Gretzky and Lemieux in the system is the wrong approach imo. I think they would both be able to affect change in certain ways, that would lead to more offense.

To make an easier comparison - should McDavid be as talented as Lemieux/Gretzky were (he's not, but let's pretend he was so we're talking at current NHL reality for a minute) - I could have seen him doing the same with Edmonton within the next 1-2 years as he grows into the league, pushing Edmonton to an offense style game, racking up a ton of points and also wins because they are good, and earning more PP opportunities in the process. And breaking barriers of NHL Scorers, above the 87 of last year or 104 of Crosby 2 years ago, but rather going upwards of 130, 150, 160, etc. (keep in mind - i'm not saying McDavid is good enough to do this, but i'm saying Lemieux/Gretzky would in his place).

 

[daver]

How better can the ''benefit of today'' makes you as a top player compared to the 80s? I assume Gretzky, once transported in the time-machine, would start to train with modern equipment, wear modern equipment and eat what athletes eat today, so maybe a year of adjustment but you would already see whatever difference it can really make, even if at 17 he would still be in the late-70s and magically appear at 20-21 in today's NHL.

I was always suspicious of all these factors in boosting a hockey player to any significant level though.It is my understanding that many players today are not taking their health as seriously as people think.It's case by case.And as a growing up regimen, I would take Walter Gretzky's methods of studying the game over better nutrition and training equipment.

A guy like Lafleur had a superior training method and natural giftedness/athleticism (slow heartbeat) than 95% of today's players.He was working much harder at getting better, always the first at the rink in the morning and so on.That's more important than better food or training gear.There was a video of Lafleur (which I can't find no more) with 10 pucks in front him along the board slapshotting every single one of them in the absolute outside top corner of the net in his 40s as he was training for a old-timer games tour.Many players today don't have that technic at all.It was impressive to see, the shots were strong as well for an old man.

I think you are overthinking this concept and I believe the OP if not explicitly, then assumes Wayne and Mario would have been developed the same way Crosby and McDavid were for example. With this is in mind, I don't there is a reason to believe their natural talents would have been developed better or worse than any other prodigy's has been in the current NHL.

 

[daver]

Speaking of Power Plays in today's league.

I think even Pittsburgh, a team with Crosby and Malkin, play a defensive style game today.

I don't think a team with Gretzky or Lemieux would. And that's the major difference. I think both are so dominant offensively that there wouldn't be restrains on them.

As a result, they would score more, and also generate a lot more power play opportunities.

Looking at the league last season exactly as it was and trying to insert Gretzky and Lemieux in the system is the wrong approach imo. I think they would both be able to affect change in certain ways, that would lead to more offense.

To make an easier comparison - should McDavid be as talented as Lemieux/Gretzky were (he's not, but let's pretend he was so we're talking at current NHL reality for a minute) - I could have seen him doing the same with Edmonton within the next 1-2 years as he grows into the league, pushing Edmonton to an offense style game, racking up a ton of points and also wins because they are good, and earning more PP opportunities in the process. And breaking barriers of NHL Scorers, above the 87 of last year or 104 of Crosby 2 years ago, but rather going upwards of 130, 150, 160, etc. (keep in mind - i'm not saying McDavid is good enough to do this, but i'm saying Lemieux/Gretzky would in his place).

But this is already accounted for in the % that they would be beating the pack by. They were unrestrained and likely creating more PPs in the '80s and '90s on a relative basis to their peers and this is reflected in the 140 figure.

I don't think Pittsburgh necessarily plays a defensive system. Compared to teams in the '80s and early '90s I guess they do but not on a relative basis to other current teams.

I don't disagree that Wayne and Mario could create a shift towards more open hockey generally and put up more than 140 as long as it's accepted that the other elite forwards would also see an increase in their scoring too.

That being said, I think when the scoring environment tightens up due to better defensive systems, shotblocking, better goaltending, and lower PPs, the gap between the very best and the best naturally decreases.

 

[JackSlater]

If by today it means last season and this season it's a range, the top end would be 120ish points for either guy and for different reasons.

Of course one can write anything and I have even seen people trying to say that they would score more but all of the "evidence" or data that we know tells us that anything more than 120 would be highly improbable to say the least.

Is scoring 200+ points in the 80s not also highly improbable?

Anyway, Gretzky was beating second place scorers by roughly ~70% when he was at his peak and no one had a standout year. I think we can all agree that Benn's 87 points to lead the NHL last year was not a standout performance. Beating Benn's 87 points by 70% puts Gretzky at 148 points. Seems reasonable enough. Could be a bit lower some years, could be a bit higher.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I believe that the difficulty scoring points is reflected well in the league GPG, although the lack of PPs does hurt stars who tend to score relatively more points on the PP.

One thing that belies this supposed difficulty is the performance of some of the older star forwards over the past several years:

Sedins- Daniel's career high in PPG was at age 29 ('10) and his career highs in goals & points were when he won the Ross at age 30 ('11). Henrik's two best seasons in points were at ages 29 & 30, when he won the Ross in '10 and finished 4th in '11. Daniel's 76 & Henrik's 73 points in '15, at age 34, were good for 8th & 10th.

St. Louis- Obviously a late bloomer, but still... set career highs in goals & points at age 31 in '07 (5th in each)... two of his other 4 best point seasons were at ages 34 & 35 in '10 & '11 (was 6th & 2nd)... won the Ross, with career highs in PPG and adj. points at age 37 in '13.

Iginla- Won the Richard & Ross w/ 52G & 96P in '02 at age 24. His next best goal seasons were at age 30 & 33 ('08 & '11). His career high in points were at 30 ('08) and the other of his best 5 point seasons were at 29, 31, and 33 ('07, '09 & '11). The last two seasons, he's still averaged 60 points at ages 36 & 37.

Hossa- Topped 60 points each of the past two seasons at ages 34-36.

Sharp- Set a career high in points in '14 at age 32.

Datsyuk- His two best seasons were at ages 29 & 30 in '08 & '09. He continues to be consistently ~PPG into his mid-30s.

Zetterberg- Two of his top 3 adjusted point seasons were at ages 30 & 32 ('11 & '13) and he continues to be ~PPG in his early-mid-30s.

Players who were 30+ before end of regular season that finished top 15 in points [or PPG in brackets] since '93 (only time in top 15 at age 30+ is bolded):

1993: 3 Oates (30)... [12 Gretzky (32)]
1994: 1 Gretzky (33), 3 Oates (31), 4 Gilmour (30), t9 Andreychuk (30), t15 Francis (30)... [12 Bourque (33)]
1995: 5 Francis (31), t6 Coffey (33), t10 Messier (34), t10 Oates (32), t12 Nicholls (33), t14 Hull (30)
1996: 1 Lemeiux (30), 4 Francis (32), 12 Gretzky (35), t13 Messier (35)... [12 Oates (33)]
1997: 1 Lemieux (31), t4 Gretzky (36), t8 Francis (33), t13 Yzerman (31), 15 Messier (36)
1998: t3 Gretzky (37), t5 Francis (34), t11 Bondra (30), 13 Oates (35), t14 Recchi (30)... [9 Hull (33)]
1999: t7 Fleury (30)
2000: 3 Recchi (31), t8 Sakic (30), 10 Yzerman (34), t11 Roenick (30), t11 Shanahan (31), 13 LeClair (30)... [3 Turgeon (30), 12 Robitaille (33)]
2001: 2 Sakic (31), 7 Bure (30), 8 Weight (30), t11 Robitaille (34), 13 Guerin (30), 14 Modano (30), 15 Mogilny (31)... [1 Lemieux (35), 7 Fleury (32), 12 Recchi (33)]
2002: 4 Sundin (30), t5 Jagr (30), t5 Sakic (30), t7 Oates (39), t9 Francis (38), t9 Modano (31), t12 Conroy (30), t12 Shanahan (33), t12 Tkachuk (30)... [8 Bure (31)]
2003: 7 Murray (30), 8 Lemieux (37), t10 Modano (32), t10 Palffy (30), 12 Fedorov (33), t15 Mogilny (33)... [14 Jagr (31), t15 Alfredsson (30), t15 Sakic (33)]
2004: t2 Sakic (34), 4 Naslund (30), t7 Aldredsson (31), t7 Stillman (30), t9 Lang (33), t12 Recchi (36), t12 Sundin (32), 15 Jagr (32)... [1 Forsberg (30)]
2006: 2 Jagr (34), t4 Alfredsson (33), t13 Selanne (35)... [9 Forsberg (32)]
2007: 5 St. Louis (31), t6 Sakic (37), t8 Jagr (35), t11 Selanne (36), t14 Alfredsson (34)
2008: 3 Iginla (30), 9 Alfredsson (35), 11 Kovalev (34), t12 St. Louis (32)
2009: 4 Datsyuk (30), 8 Iginla (31), t9 M. Savard (31)
2010: 6 St. Louis (34), 8 Thornton (30), 14 Marleau (30)
2011: 1 D. Sedin (30), 2 St. Louis (35), 4 H. Sedin (30), 6 Iginla (33), t8 Selanne (40), t8 Zetterberg (30), 10 B. Richards (30)... [11 Datsyuk (32)]
2012: t7 H. Sedin (31), t10 Elias (35), t12 Hossa (33), t12 Thornton (32), t12 Whitney (39)
2013: 1 St. Louis (37), t7 Kunitz (33), t10 Datsyuk (34), t10 Ribeiro (32), t13 Zetterberg (32)
2014: 12 Sharp (32), 13 Thornton (34)
2015: t8 Hudler (31), t8 D. Sedin (34), t10 H. Sedin (34)... [6 Datsyuk (36)]

Now it's interesting to compare the seasons thru '99 or '00 with some of the later years. One can make some sort of decent HHOF argument for just about anyone who appears until about '03. Then in '03 & '04, we have the likes of Murray, Lang, and Stillman... obviously not even close to HHOF. The past few seasons have seen the likes of Whitney, Kunitz, Ribeiro, Sharp, and Hudler. None of these guys is going to incite protests when excluded from HHOF.

When you look at the combination of how high these age 30+ players finished, how old they were, and how good they were, it gives you some idea of the competition. The past 5 seasons don't appear especially difficult in this regard:

2011- St. Louis 2nd at age 35... Selanne 8th at age 40?
2012- Elias (35), Hossa (33), and Whitney (39!) making their only appearances in the top 15???
2013- St. Louis wins the Ross at age 37!?!
2015- Hudler (sole appearance) and both Sedins (age 34) in top 10??

Also, somehow we're supposed to believe the NHL has virtually impenetrable systems and the competition is way beyond that of 20 years ago... yet a 31 y/o Jiri Hudler led the NHL in ES points and an undrafted Tyler Johnson tied for third. Yeah, no... not gonna buy that for a dollar!

It is interesting how many mid-late 30s scorers there have been recently.

It certainly flies in the face of the today's players are bionic superheroes theory..

Big glut of them in the early 2000s too when there was a pretty good dip in the forward ranks..

 

[bobholly39]

But this is already accounted for in the % that they would be beating the pack by. They were unrestrained and likely creating more PPs in the '80s and '90s on a relative basis to their peers and this is reflected in the 140 figure.

I don't think Pittsburgh necessarily plays a defensive system. Compared to teams in the '80s and early '90s I guess they do but not on a relative basis to other current teams.

I don't disagree that Wayne and Mario could create a shift towards more open hockey generally and put up more than 140 as long as it's accepted that the other elite forwards would also see an increase in their scoring too.

That being said, I think when the scoring environment tightens up due to better defensive systems, shotblocking, better goaltending, and lower PPs, the gap between the very best and the best naturally decreases.

That's what I think.

If Gretzky was in the league last year, and if Gretzky had his best season ever - let's pretend we agree that translates to 180 points just for the fun of this example - the 2nd best scorer wouldn't have been at 87 points, but higher.

So I agree that when I'm arguing that Lemieux/Gretzky would still attain very high totals, i think other elite scorers would also score a bit more.

Is it a huge stretch to argue that Gretzky actually *did* that very thing in the 80s? If you eliminate Gretzky from the history of hockey - I think Lemieux very possibly still scores at the same rate he did in his career, maybe ever so slightly less...BUT, do you think if Gretzky doesn't exist in the 80s Yzerman scores 155 in 1989?

I don't think so. And it's not meant to be a knock on Yzerman, but i just think without Gretzky being so good so as to break all the records, maybe the game isn't so offense driven in the 80s and maybe guys like Yzerman and others don't score at such a high rate by default.

Just a theory, hopefully i don't get burnt to the stake for suggesting it

 

[Reindl87]

Well no rocket science there.

Take Marios/Wayne PPG during their prime seasons (or whatever Version of them you are interested in) and compare it through the average PPG of the Top 20 scorers in those seasons. You'll get a value that Shows Mario/Wayne scored 170% of the Points of the average Top 20 scorer. (I didn't calculate the number, it's just an example)

Then calculate the average Points Produced by the Top 20 scorers last season.
Then multiply that value with the facor from the first calculation.

So for example 75 Point x 170% = 128Points

 

[bobholly39]

Is scoring 200+ points in the 80s not also highly improbable?

Anyway, Gretzky was beating second place scorers by roughly ~70% when he was at his peak and no one had a standout year. I think we can all agree that Benn's 87 points to lead the NHL last year was not a standout performance. Beating Benn's 87 points by 70% puts Gretzky at 148 points. Seems reasonable enough. Could be a bit lower some years, could be a bit higher.

I know i'm repeating myself, but i really think we're looking at this from the wrong perspective.

I feel as though everyone is thinking: "Ok - today's league, let's look at its numbers and dynamics. It supports how many points scored by the best offensive players of all-time?". And then you reach a number, whether it's 120, 150 or whatever.

I think it'd be more like: "Ok. The best player of all-time - Gretzky/Lemieux - were good enough to score ~200 points. Should they come into today's NHL, and should they score 200 points again, how will it affect the rest of the league?".

I could be wrong I suppose, but i honnestly think Gretzky and Lemieux could still score at comparable rates as they did in the 80s and early 90s. Maybe a bit less, but certainly not as low as 120 and 130.

 

[JackSlater]

I know i'm repeating myself, but i really think we're looking at this from the wrong perspective.

I feel as though everyone is thinking: "Ok - today's league, let's look at its numbers and dynamics. It supports how many points scored by the best offensive players of all-time?". And then you reach a number, whether it's 120, 150 or whatever.

I think it'd be more like: "Ok. The best player of all-time - Gretzky/Lemieux - were good enough to score ~200 points. Should they come into today's NHL, and should they score 200 points again, how will it affect the rest of the league?".

I could be wrong I suppose, but i honnestly think Gretzky and Lemieux could still score at comparable rates as they did in the 80s and early 90s. Maybe a bit less, but certainly not as low as 120 and 130.

If Gretzky could come in an score around 200 today, even though the style of play in the NHL is drastically different, that basically means that league context is irrelevant to any scorer and we should take points purely at face value. A little difficult to accept.

 

[shazariahl]

Unless a player only scores at ES, and there aren't any, the lack of PPs hurts every elite offensive player. This is the major factor, if not the only factor, why scoring by the Art Ross leaders is lower compared to years in the DPE where overall league scoring was at a similar rate. If you compare 2000/01 to 2013/14, you will see the average PPG of the Top Ten scorers is lower by the lower amount of scoring on the PP by the Top Ten scorers. When scoring levels by the elite gets more packed together it introduces parity, where seemingly less than elite players can make their way into the top echelon.

Frankly introducing the "well so and so wouldn't have finished in the Top Ten in the '90s" is an extremely weak argument and adds zero to a discussion on an interesting topic.

I do think a lack of PP opportunities hurts Lemieux a lot more than it does Gretzky, however. His best seasons saw the Pens with ridiculous numbers of PP chances and, while the two produced points at roughly the same pace with the PP, Gretzky has been clearly shown on this board to be a better producer at ES. So while I agree that less PP chances hurts all star players, I do think it would hurt a guy like Lemieux more than Gretzky.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Is scoring 200+ points in the 80s not also highly improbable?

sure it was and it only happened with a single player but then again Epsosito scored 152 points in a perfect storm in boston in the 70's right?

People tend to forget the state of the NHL in 79 when the Oilers were created with Gretzky and company and the Oilers played a more European style of hockey, from the WHA influence than many NHL teams and had a mentality and brought great skaters and skilled guys together to make a team that didn't care a lick about defense and wanted to win 7-5 every game.

That type of mentality and advantage simply isn't possible today.

Teams can simply lock down, block lanes and play a 100% defesnive game and with the skill set of defenders, goalie advancements, equipment, teams can't run up the score anymore and that's where Wayne and Mario really had most of their point advantages in their peak seasons.

Anyway, Gretzky was beating second place scorers by roughly ~70% when he was at his peak and no one had a standout year. I think we can all agree that Benn's 87 points to lead the NHL last year was not a standout performance. Beating Benn's 87 points by 70% puts Gretzky at 148 points. Seems reasonable enough. Could be a bit lower some years, could be a bit higher.

I'm hoping last year was an aberration in scoring but I doubt it.

Bettman loves to sell the balance of the league and keeping scoring down, ie not making changes to goaltending equipment helps him sell the competitive balance angle and he has zero interest in promoting the skilled side of hockey.

The start of the season always brings new optimism in reguards to scoring coming back but by the time most teams reach 10 games there will be maybe 20 guys in the league at a PPG mark, maybe more but as the season wears on that number will decrease more steadily till there are simply maybe a hand full or 2 able to maintain it under current NHL conditions.

I'm hoping that I'm wrong but we have all seen the trends.

 

[Mickey Marner]

If you adjust Gretzky's 1997-98 ESP/60 and PPP/60 to the ice time Tavares received last season he finishes with 87 points. So he loses the scoring title on a goal tie-breaker to Benn. And this is 37 year old Gretzky playing for the out of the playoffs Rangers that scored just 197 goals not the 261 goal Dallas Stars or 252 goal Islanders.

 

[JackSlater]

sure it was and it only happened with a single player but then again Epsosito scored 152 points in a perfect storm in boston in the 70's right?

Sure... what is your point? You said that scoring more than 120 points would be highly improbable, we already have ample evidence of Gretzky (and Lemieux) repeatedly doing things that were highly improbable.

People tend to forget the state of the NHL in 79 when the Oilers were created with Gretzky and company and the Oilers played a more European style of hockey, from the WHA influence than many NHL teams and had a mentality and brought great skaters and skilled guys together to make a team that didn't care a lick about defense and wanted to win 7-5 every game.

That type of mentality and advantage simply isn't possible today.

Teams can simply lock down, block lanes and play a 100% defesnive game and with the skill set of defenders, goalie advancements, equipment, teams can't run up the score anymore and that's where Wayne and Mario really had most of their point advantages in their peak seasons.

You gave reasons why Gretzky's scoring would go down, and of course that's true. Unless you have some proof about Gretzky (and Lemieux) having access to more blowout opportunities than other players, other than those brought on by the fact that they were better than the opposition, then Gretzky is likely affected in a pretty similar way to the others.

I'm hoping last year was an aberration in scoring but I doubt it.

Bettman loves to sell the balance of the league and keeping scoring down, ie not making changes to goaltending equipment helps him sell the competitive balance angle and he has zero interest in promoting the skilled side of hockey.

The start of the season always brings new optimism in reguards to scoring coming back but by the time most teams reach 10 games there will be maybe 20 guys in the league at a PPG mark, maybe more but as the season wears on that number will decrease more steadily till there are simply maybe a hand full or 2 able to maintain it under current NHL conditions.

I'm hoping that I'm wrong but we have all seen the trends.

Yeah, 80 points is looking like the new 100 points, based at least on the last few years. Luckily for Gretzky he wasn't remotely close to 100 points in his best years.

 

[Joedaman55]

In todays NHL I think Lemieux would get somewhere between 150-160 points and Gretzky 160-175 points at their peaks.

Scoring has gone down quite a bit which would lower their totals. In overall points, I think the NHL is waiting for the next player to come in and really come in and dominate the league. Crosby was that player before he got hurt and Ovechkin is that player when it comes to scoring goals. Would anyone disagree that the competition for the Art Ross trophy has been weaker than previous years?