All-time goals per game. #1 Mike Bossy. #2 Mario Lemieux. Howe? 26.
All-time points per game. #1 Wayne Gretzky. #2 Mario Lemieux. Howe? 27.
Howe was clearly better? Really?
Lemieux played in an era when there were 7.5 goals per game; Howe played in an era when there were 5.5 goals per game. Comparing their raw numbers is less than useless, it's misleading. Kent Nilsson, Bernie Nicholls and Pat Lafontaine scored more points per game than Howe. Are they better players, or is it because they played in a higher-scoring era?
Lemieux had everything going for him except a wonky body that would fall apart on him, but I still take him and his minus 1000 game career over 26 years of Howe just because he was so dominant offensively.
I want to address the issue of whether Lemieux or Howe was more dominant in their primes. I've compared how many points they scored, relative to the rest of the league, during each of their six Art Ross victories. Note that
this is the most favourable possible comparison for Lemieux; if I expanded this and included more years, Howe's significant edge in longevity would become apparent.
Here's how Lemieux did in his six best years, relative to the league:
Name GP G A Pts
Mario Lemieux 423 387 554 941 1.00
Wayne Gretzky 423 189 513 702 1.34
Steve Yzerman 468 276 401 677 1.39
Mark Messier 448 213 373 586 1.61
Luc Robitaille 468 253 305 558 1.69
Adam Oates 446 142 405 547 1.72
Doug Gilmour 467 174 365 539 1.75
Pierre Turgeon 474 210 328 538 1.75
Brett Hull 443 282 241 523 1.80
Pat LaFontaine 384 233 287 520 1.81
During his best six years, Lemieux outscored the nearest competitor by 34%. Of course, that's not exactly a fair comparison. Gretzky is the greatest scorer ever. Omitting Gretzky, we see that Lemieux outscored the next-best player, Yzerman, by 39%. After that, there's a big drop. Lemieux outscored the rest of the players on this list by 61% to 81%. All of them except Turgeon are HOFers. So, Lemieux fares extremely well. Let's see how Howe does.
Name GP G A Pts
Gordie Howe 420 254 269 528 1.00
Ted Lindsay 347 142 204 346 1.53
Maurice Richard 316 167 133 300 1.76
Red Kelly 410 98 191 289 1.83
Bernie Geoffrion 296 131 111 242 2.18
Alex Delvecchio 323 78 152 230 2.30
Sid Smith 350 116 110 226 2.34
Bert Olmstead 326 72 149 221 2.39
Doug Harvey 413 33 185 218 2.42
I think this should permanently end any doubts about whether Howe was really dominant in his prime. He didn't just outscore the rest of the league, he obliterated them. Howe finished an incredible 53% ahead of the next-best player (this is by a higher amount than Lemieux's margin of victory over Yzerman). The next best player was Howe's linemate, Ted Lindsay. The fact that Howe was able to outscore his full-time linemate, who's one of the top 20 forwards of all time, is a testament to his dominance.
Howe's dominance doesn't end there. Every player on this list is a HOFer. He outscored them by 76% to 142%. Those numbers are matched in history only by Gretzky. When a player can DOUBLE what every other player in the league has scored (except for Lindsay, Richard and Kelly!) over a six year span, they've achieved a historic accomplishment that will never again be achieved.
These numbers conclusively demonstrate that Howe was
at least as dominant offensively as Lemieux; in fact, Howe was probably better. When you consider the intangibles (defense, physical play, leadership), it's an easy decision in favor of Howe.