Pavel Bure's place among NHL's all-time greatest goal scorers

[sr edler]

How do the next 5 adjusted goal seasons look?

bure only played 5 full nhl seasons, with more than 70 games, so obviously bossy kills him in the next 5 as for goals totals

 

[Reasoned Opinion]

NHL: 766 GP - 472 G - 377 A - 849 PTS

50.53 goals per 82 games

Olympics: 12 GP - 11 G - 1 A - 12 PTS

I threw in the Olympic numbers since those totals came in Winter Games that NHLers were permitted to participate.

So, who's ahead of him?

He is in top 10-15 all time as a pure goal scorer. Not being in HOF is a farce given others there before him including peers like Neely.

Quite simply one of the most exciting hockey players in the history of the game. Fact that he scored bulk of his goals in the post-Oiler dead puck era when scoring 40 was the new 60 makes his accomplishments even more impressive.

 

[PKV Jungle Friends]

Top 10, not top 5.

I'm a huge Bure fan and even I know this is insanity...

Try top 25 (maybe), not top 10.

The guy probably could have been in that category, but he didn't play long enough and it's tough to do the whole, "Oh, but he WOULD have" argument, because you just never know.

That said, he was a joy to watch and will always be one of my favorite non-Penguins ever.

God, was he good on NHL 94'. So fast...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

bure only played 5 full nhl seasons, with more than 70 games, so obviously bossy kills him in the next 5 as for goals totals

Exactly, and that should count against him when being compared to the very best ever.

 

[RusskiyHockey]

Lemieux.

Ah, of course! He had some insane seasons in the early '90s.

 

[Starchild74]

I personally don't even think of Bure as a "sniper." To me, a sniper is a guy who scores lots of goals with an amazing shot. A guy like Mike Bossy, Brett Hull, Steve Stamkos. To me, Bure is more of a "breakaway artist."



I'm just being kind of a jerk here but...

If Bure wasn't born yet in 1982, doesn't that make him less than 12 years old in 1994?

After reading it now it is funny What I was trying to say and what I wrote was different but hey he was the best 12 year old out there though right lol

 

[Starchild74]

Yeah the problem is though there's no context regarding your rankings. By simply presenting Bossy's career stats you fail to take into account that Bossy played his whole career in most of the highest scoring seasons in history. It's ok to rank Bossy better than Bure all time, but to say it's not even close is just wrong.

Mike Bossy
Regular season adjusted stats 752gp 461g 445a 906pts

Pavel Bure
Regular season adjusted stats 702gp 463g 360a 823pts

Don't have the adjusted playoff stats unless I adjust them myself, but that would come out fairly comparable as well considering Bossy only has a 1.24 ppg average compared to 1.09 for Bure, and Bossy's playoff years were just as much more high scoring than Bure's playoff years as the regular season years, if not more so actually.

This also doesn't take into account the fact that Bossy, for 90% of his career was on the ice with Denis Potvin and Bryan Trottier. We all know who Bure mostly played with. I also find it strange that considering Bossy was on that Dynasty, and arguably their best player(Trottier), he's only a +3 in the playoffs, while Bure, the no defense cherry picker who played on average to below average teams in his playoff years, was +8.

Someone's going to try to tell me these stats don't mean as much as the raw ones, and that's just not arguable as far as im concerned.

First of all I don't care about adjusted stats. Bossy Scored 50 goals 9 straight seasons. Even if it was the so called high scoring era no one else did that then. His first 9 seasons were 50 plus goals that is a pure goal scorer and he did it for quite a while playing with a bad backl

Mike Bossy is only a plus 3 because in the beginning of his career +/- was not floowed as much for stats in the playoffs. SO his +/- is not a acurate stat.

Mike Bossy was never considered a two way player even he himself admits he wasn't that good defensively. That at times even he felt it was unfair that a guy like Trottier would be called out for his defensive play by Arbour when Bossy wasn't. So whether Bossy plus minus is high or not has no bearing on whether he was a great goal scorer or not

Also I was just putting down the stats to show that if by using stats their are others with way better stats then him. Secondly it is about goals. We aren't talking about the best wingers in the NHL. Or the wingers that scored the most points. It is about a goal scorer and Mike Bossy was way better then Bure at putting the puck in the net. He was the first player to score 50 in 50 since the Rocket did it.

Pavel Bure had some great years but then had years where he didn't do much because of injuries. Who knows what would have happened if he was not injured. However just like adjusted stats it is all about what if or what could have. THe facts are that Mike Bossy was a dominant goal scorer in the NHL from the day he entered in the NHL until he retired. Bure was dominant maybe 5 years of his career aproximately. That is the difference

 

[Starchild74]

Also, on the subject of Brett Hull do you realize that outside of the 3 straight years he was centered by Adam Oates, a better all time playmaker in comparison to Hull as a goal scorer, he never finished in the top 10 in points or points per game? It was a given Bure would do this atleast point per game wise every single season regardless of who he played with. Oates had seasons on the same production level even the year in Boston where Neely only played 10 games, and Hull never reached that level again. Obviously, he was a really good goal scorer his whole career, but easily better than Bure? Give me a break.

Yes Brett Hull's 3 best seasons goal scoring wise were the 3 years in which he played with Oates. Oates was traded during that third 3 though. Some players gel together who knows why but yes after Oates he didn't reach that goal plateau again. But wait a minute. Pavel Bure never ever reached the goals that Bure did. After Oates left Hull still managed 2 more consecutive years of 50 goals. Not too shabby I think.

Brett Hull had 17 straight years of 25goals or more. 7 Seasons of 30 goals or more. 6 straight 40 goal seasons. 5 straight 50 goal seasons and 3 straight 60 goal seasons

Pavel Bure only had 7 seasons of 25 goals or more. 7 years of 30 goals or more. 5 years of 40 goals or more, 5 years of 50 goals or more and 2 consecutive years of 60 goals or more

Brett Hull put up better goal totals and more consistently then Bure. That is the fact. He was the best goal scorer at the time and if you look at the the greatest goal scoring seasons ever Brett Hull as two seasons in the top 10. Pavel Bure's best is ranked 34th.

Let's truly compare players Brett Hull was better at:

Peak-Prime, Career, Playoffs, Shooting, One timers, Snap Shot, Slap Shot, Clutch, wrist shot,

Pavel Bure was better at

Breakaways, Dekeing, more exciting goals, Prettier goals, on the rush, favourite player to watch(Okay that one doesn't really count)

Brett Hull wins hands down

 

[Trottier]

I also find it strange that considering Bossy was on that Dynasty...he's only a +3 in the playoffs.

I have no desire to convince you or anyone else about Bure v. Bossy. Nor am I here to suggest that Bure was not a great offensive player; he was.

That said, I'm sorry but it MUST be stated. Your citing of the statistic above is simply evidence of how meaningless are numbers presented out of context.

Dear Lord. Ask anyone who watched Michael Bossy, the springs of 1980-83. He was nothing short of DOMINANT. A GREAT sniper elevating his already world-class game to another level when the games mattered most.

Citing his +/-?!

I mean it's downright laughable. Nothing personal, of course.

 

[seventieslord]

Yeah the problem is though there's no context regarding your rankings. By simply presenting Bossy's career stats you fail to take into account that Bossy played his whole career in most of the highest scoring seasons in history. It's ok to rank Bossy better than Bure all time, but to say it's not even close is just wrong.

I don't want to quote canon as though it's true, but Bossy is generally ranked 20th-30th on all-time lists while Bure doesn't grace the top-100. So in that regard it's not close.

You might be underestimating the value of a strong playoff resume. Bossy was huge in the playoffs - a very important piece of a very dominant team.

I also find it strange that considering Bossy was on that Dynasty, and arguably their best player(Trottier), he's only a +3 in the playoffs, while Bure, the no defense cherry picker who played on average to below average teams in his playoff years, was +8.

That +3 misses all of Bossy's best playoff years.

dead puck era when scoring 40 was the new 60 makes his accomplishments even more impressive.

Scoring never dropped to the point where 40 was the new 60.

I get what you're saying, but you are exaggerating.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

I have no desire to convince you or anyone else about Bure v. Bossy. Nor am I here to suggest that Bure was not a great offensive player; he was.

That said, I'm sorry but it MUST be stated. Your citing of the statistic above is simply evidence of how meaningless are numbers presented out of context.

Dear Lord. Ask anyone who watched Michael Bossy, the springs of 1980-83. He was nothing short of DOMINANT. A GREAT sniper elevating his already world-class game to another level when the games mattered most.

Citing his +/-?!

I mean it's downright laughable. Nothing personal, of course.

I don't want to quote canon as though it's true, but Bossy is generally ranked 20th-30th on all-time lists while Bure doesn't grace the top-100. So in that regard it's not close.
You might be underestimating the value of a strong playoff resume. Bossy was huge in the playoffs - a very important piece of a very dominant team.



That +3 misses all of Bossy's best playoff years.



Scoring never dropped to the point where 40 was the new 60.

I get what you're saying, but you are exaggerating.

Bure twice lead the league in goals by bigger margins than Bossy ever did, even in a year he missed 8 games. Call me crazy for thinking Bure was atleast as good a goalscorer as Bossy.

 

[seventieslord]

Bure twice lead the league in goals by bigger margins than Bossy ever did, even in a year he missed 8 games. Call me crazy for thinking Bure was atleast as good a goalscorer as Bossy.

I don't call you crazy. But the situational differences did give Bure an advantage too, as discussed in this thread.

And right or wrong, higher value tends to be assigned to goals that mean something, i.e. contribute to winning and championships.

 

[Form and Substance]

I always thought that that at their peaks, Bure was more dangerous than Selanne but that Selanne was slightly more versatile. Although Bure was primarily a goal scorer, his ability to annihilate gameplans to me makes him one of the most unique superstars of the last 25 years. He HAS to be in the hall. It would be a mockery if he weren't.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

Slightly off topic, but one thing I noticed about Bure in his Vancouver years (at least)... often, early in the game, he would waste a high hard slap shot right at a goalie's head. Maybe not the most sportsman-like maneuver, but it seemed make goalies a bit more squirrel-y and I believe, allowed him to score on some of his one-timers. I'm actually surprised that more players don't try this technique. As a former goalie, I gotta say, other than a crotch shot, nothing rattled me more that a puck to the head.

 

[Trottier]

Bure twice lead the league in goals by bigger margins than Bossy ever did, even in a year he missed 8 games. Call me crazy for thinking Bure was atleast as good a goalscorer as Bossy.

Why do you quote my post in citing your opinion that Bure is equal or superior to Bossy? I do not agree with your opinion, but I respect it. And again, as I previously stated clearly, that was not my point, at all. My point is that citing Mike Bossy's playoff +/- demonstrates a lack of common knowledge or appreciation for just how ridiculously dominant he was in the postseason.

But perhaps I'm trying to conduct an informed discussion of the player with a poster reciting numbers and numbers only, bereft of any first-hand observation of the situation (Bossy/playoffs) of which he is commenting? Nothing "bad" about that, except it lends itself to highly limited discourse.

 

[Xelebes]

Best Goal Scorers:

Mike Bossy (9 straight seasons above 50 goals)
Bobby Hull (lead league in goals 7 times)
Wayne Gretzky (40% advantage over the competition in record year)
Mario Lemieux (second in competition race)
Cy Denneny (.756 GPG)

Maurice Richard (50/50, 56% advantage, led goals four more after that)
Alexander Ovechkin (A more frightening Bure)
Phil Esposito (set record at time, 50% advantage over competition)
Gordie Howe (led league 5 times)
Joe Malone (2.44 gpg in season)

Bure has to best at least one of them to be included.

 

[overpass]

I have no desire to convince you or anyone else about Bure v. Bossy. Nor am I here to suggest that Bure was not a great offensive player; he was.

That said, I'm sorry but it MUST be stated. Your citing of the statistic above is simply evidence of how meaningless are numbers presented out of context.

Dear Lord. Ask anyone who watched Michael Bossy, the springs of 1980-83. He was nothing short of DOMINANT. A GREAT sniper elevating his already world-class game to another level when the games mattered most.

Citing his +/-?!

I mean it's downright laughable. Nothing personal, of course.

A piece of context for you and the poster you are quoting...playoff plus-minus was only recorded from 1984 on. So Bossy had a plus-minus of +3 in 40 playoff games from 1984 to 1987. It doesn't seem terribly meaningful given what else he did in the playoffs.

 

[Seanconn*]

Agreed. Gretzky in the same category as Gartner made my eyes hurt. Gretzky was scoring more goals than Bossy when they were in the league at the same time - they should be in the same category at least.

it just makes no sense.

pure goal scorer, or goal scorer who got 3 times as many assists.

if scoring more than a goal a game to get 92 goals in one season, doesn't at least get you the number 2 spot...

and bure could easily be justifiably in the top 10 for this list... like how is that hard to imagine at all :| the kid was incredible.

 

[buffalowing88]

As with many topics on this forum, it's really ability vs. consistency. Since this is the History of Hockey board and not the "Potential Speculation" board, I think it's fair to say that the sheer numbers and consistency of the 20 odd guys listed above Bure make a solid enough argument...if he could have kept it up at a longer pace or hit a few more milestones, than things may be different but as it stands, Bure is probably just scraping top 25 goal scorers of all time.

That said, he certainly belongs in the top 10 most dynamic goal scorers of all time. The guy could change the pace of the game in a second.

 

[sr edler]

Slightly off topic, but one thing I noticed about Bure in his Vancouver years (at least)... often, early in the game, he would waste a high hard slap shot right at a goalie's head. Maybe not the most sportsman-like maneuver, but it seemed make goalies a bit more squirrel-y and I believe, allowed him to score on some of his one-timers. I'm actually surprised that more players don't try this technique. As a former goalie, I gotta say, other than a crotch shot, nothing rattled me more that a puck to the head.

he did that on a regular basis? really? it sounds strange, i mean if he's good enough to hit a goalie straight in the head with a slap shot then why not direct the shot a bit off the head and score instead? not like it's an impossibility that he tried it a few times, but if he did it from game to game wouldn't that have made him very impopular?

As with many topics on this forum, it's really ability vs. consistency. Since this is the History of Hockey board and not the "Potential Speculation" board, I think it's fair to say that the sheer numbers and consistency of the 20 odd guys listed above Bure make a solid enough argument...if he could have kept it up at a longer pace or hit a few more milestones, than things may be different but as it stands, Bure is probably just scraping top 25 goal scorers of all time.

That said, he certainly belongs in the top 10 most dynamic goal scorers of all time. The guy could change the pace of the game in a second.

see what you mean but the only 5 full seasons he played in the nhl he scored 51, 58, 59, 60, and 60 goals, so when he was healthy and played a full season he delivered

i'm also a little puzzled why selänne fans in this thread highlights bure's ice time with the panthers so much, you do realize selänne played first line minutes and was given first pp unit ice time right from the start with the jets? you really think someone would score, even in a coco season as 1992-93, 76 goals in his rookie season without heavily loaded minutes? ... hockey-reference doesn't have the ice time but he was on the first line and first pp unit the whole season

 

[David Bruce Banner]

he did that on a regular basis? really? it sounds strange, i mean if he's good enough to hit a goalie straight in the head with a slap shot then why not direct the shot a bit off the head and score instead? not like it's an impossibility that he tried it a few times, but if he did it from game to game wouldn't that have made him very impopular?

He didn't do it all the time, but it was a tactic I definitely noticed. If he had an opportunity to take a shot, but it wasn't a really good scoring opportunity, that's when he would waste a high, hard one. And, yes, he probably wasn't too popular with the goalies.

 

[Merya]

Do you disagree that Stamkos scores most of his goals with his shot?

You don't have to be an "all time great" to be talked about on this board as an example of a category of player.

I grudgingly accept the validity of mentioning OV and Crosby in the history section, but one very good year of Stamkos with pretty small shot repertoire doesn't belong even as style comparison IMO. (Stamkos did say in an interview that he spent the summer practising more variables tho.)

 

[jepjepjoo]

i'm also a little puzzled why selänne fans in this thread highlights bure's ice time with the panthers so much, you do realize selänne played first line minutes and was given first pp unit ice time right from the start with the jets? you really think someone would score, even in a coco season as 1992-93, 76 goals in his rookie season without heavily loaded minutes? ... hockey-reference doesn't have the ice time but he was on the first line and first pp unit the whole season

Congratulations! You win the worst reading comprehension and context understanding awards. Both in the same day

You also finished 2nd in a close race for going off topic.

 

[sr edler]

Congratulations! You win the worst reading comprehension and context understanding awards. Both in the same day

You also finished 2nd in a close race for going off topic.

View attachment 42252

no but it's not really a surprise to see selänne fans show up in a bure thread to say bure's a weaker version of selänne when it comes to score goals

 

[Hardyvan123]

Best Goal Scorers:

Mike Bossy (9 straight seasons above 50 goals)
Bobby Hull (lead league in goals 7 times)
Wayne Gretzky (40% advantage over the competition in record year)
Mario Lemieux (second in competition race)
Cy Denneny (.756 GPG)

Maurice Richard (50/50, 56% advantage, led goals four more after that)
Alexander Ovechkin (A more frightening Bure)
Phil Esposito (set record at time, 50% advantage over competition)
Gordie Howe (led league 5 times)
Joe Malone (2.44 gpg in season)

Bure has to best at least one of them to be included.

Howe was a more complete player, not sure that he was one of the best goal scorers ever though. The 1st thing that comes to mind with him is the GH hat trick goal, assist and fight. and yes I know that he led the league in goals 5 times but Hull, rightly so, was the guy that most people think of as the Goal scorer in the NHL in the 60's.

I would also rank Bure ahead of Espo from this list as Espo was a situational (ie. in a perfect storm in Boston) and not the pure goal scorer that Bure was.