Round 2, Vote 1 (HOH Top Wingers)

[seventieslord]

IMPORTANT NOTE: Post 2 of every voting thread will contain instructions as to who to send your votes to. If you send your votes to the wrong person, we can't guarantee that they will be counted.

MOD: This is a strictly on-topic thread. Posts that don't focus on the wingers listed in Post 2 will be deleted or moved at the discretion of the moderators. This will be strictly enforced in every Round 2 voting thread, regardless of who the OP is - TDMM

Before we begin, just a recap on how Round 2 will operate:

Round 2

• The top 8-12 ranked players from the aggregate list will be posted in a thread
• Players will be listed in alphabetical order to avoid creating bias
• Player merits and rankings will be open for discussion and debate for a period of at least five (5) days. Administrators may extend the discussion period if it remains active
• Final voting will occur for two (2) days, via PM. Everyone ranks their top 8 players.
• Top 4 players will be added to the list
• Final results will be posted and the process repeated for the next 4 places with remaining players until a list of 60 wingers is obtained
• If there are major breaks in the Round 2 voting totals, we may add more or less than the targeted 4 players in certain rounds
• The number of players available for discussion at once will increase from 8 as we move down the list, based on natural breaks in the aggregate list put together in Round 1

These might be tweaked to allow longer or shorter debating periods depending on how the process moves along.

Additionally, there are a couple guidelines we'd ask that everyone agree to abide by:

• Please try to stay on-topic in the thread
• Please remember that this is a debate on opinions and there is no right or wrong. Please try to avoid words like "stupid" "dumb" "wrong" "sophistry" etc. when debating.
• Please treat other debaters with respect
• Please don't be a wallflower. All eligible voters are VERY HIGHLY encouraged to be active participants in the debate.
• Please maintain an open mind. The purpose of the debate is to convince others that your views are more valid. If nobody is willing to accept their opinions as flexible there really is no point in debating.

Eliglible Voters (23):
Andros , Art of Sedinery , BillyShoe1721 , Dennis Bonvie , Hawkey Town 18 , intylerwetrust , kmad , MadArcand , reckoning , Rob Scuderi , ted1971 , TheDevilMadeMe , the edler , tony d , Ursaguy , bigbuffalo313 , Canadiens1958 , Darth Yoda , Hardyvan123 , MXD , tarheelhockey , unknown33 , seventieslord , Johnny Engine

All posters are encouraged to participate in the debates and discussions, but only those listed above will be eligible for the final votes.

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

Vote 1 will begin now and debates are scheduled to run through Sunday Sep 21 and 9 PM EST. You may PM votes to Hawkey Town 18 starting on Saturday, Sep 20.

We will be sending out confirmations when we receive ballots from the voters. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume we never received it and should resubmit it and post in this thread saying they did so.

Vote 1 will be for places 1 through 4 (4 places) on the Top 60 list.

There are 9 eligible candidates for Vote 1. You will still only rank your Top 8 when voting.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:

Mike Bossy
Bill Cook
Gordie Howe
Bobby Hull
Jaromir Jagr
Guy Lafleur
Ted Lindsay
Sergei Makarov
Maurice Richard

 

[DaveG]

Didn't have time to do a list this year, but I'll be interested to see how this goes and even providing a bit of input from time to time if I feel I can add to the discussion.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i say this every time, but i have so much respect for you guys' work on these projects.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Pleasantly surprised to see Makarov available so early. I don't think he's top 4, but I think he fits right in with the other 5-9 players. And say what you want about his NHL career, but it was better than what Lafleur and Bossy did at a comparable age, right?

I saw a clear gap between the top 10 and the field when I constructed my list. And these were 9 of my top 10 (with the 10th having no legit shot at top 4 anyway). So we are off to a good start. Anyway, preliminary thoughts:

_______________

Gordie Howe is the obvious #1 - 6 Art Rosses, 4 of them in a row by margins only beaten by Gretzky.* 6 Hart Trophies. Top 5 scorer for 20 straight seasons. Led the playoffs in scoring 6 times. One of the toughest players ever, and a plus player defensively too.

*Click here for largest margins of victory for the Art Ross.

______________________

For me, #2-4 is where the action is this round. Traditionally, #2 is thought of as a tossup between Bobby Hull and Maurice Richard, but does Jaromir Jagr also have a case? 5 Art Ross Trophies just looks more and more special the further we get away from them. I would like to focus on comparing these 3 guys this round.

I get that Jagr over Lafleur is a change from the previous lists done on this board, and while I do think Lafleur has the playoff advantage (not that Jagr wasn't very good in the playoffs, Lafleur was just a legend), Jagr was an impact player for just so much longer than Lafleur. Also, as I said, the further we get from Jagr's prime, the more special 5 Art Rosses look.

____________________

For spots 5-7, I have Cook, Makarov, and Lafleur more or less in the same tier. I assume that will be controversial, but perhaps it is a controversy best saved for next round, unless someone wants to advocate including one of these guys in the top 4.

Bill Cook - the power forward who won 2 WCHL scoring titles back when it was an NHL rival (one of them by a wide margin when the WCHL was the NHL's only rival), then joined the NHL at the age of 30 and won 2 more scoring titles, this time in the consolidated NHL. Seems like the clear cut best winger to ever play the game until the Rocket got going in the mid 1940s.

Sergei Makarov - dominated the Soviet domestic league statistically in a way that no player other than Gretzky has ever dominated the top domestic hockey league of any nation. Excellent international player. Good longevity for a Soviet player of that era. No way to tell exactly how he compared to Bossy at his best, but we do know that he was as good as any player not named Gretzky and Lemieux in the Canada Cups, and we do know that his longevity actually beats out Bossy and Lafleur.

Guy Lafleur - His peak is as good as any winger not named Gordie Howe. Voters who value peak/prime and put a heavy emphasis on playoffs will have him high. Generally considered the best player in hockey in the late 70s - that gap in time between Bobby Orr and Wayne Gretzky. I have him over Bossy because I don't think Bossy ranked so highly among his peers - there's good case Bossy was third (but a close third) on the Islanders dynasty, while nobody ranked ahead of Lafleur on the Canadiens. The downside - did almost nothing of note outside his amazing 6 year prime.

I have Mike Bossy and Ted Lindsay a bit below the rest of these guys. Fantastic players, and as I said before, both are in my top 10. But both kind of suffer from being third best on their own teams. Granted, the two guys ahead of each were elite all-time greats, but I think that's a little bit below the other candidates, who were considered in the conversation for best in the world at some point. The other NHLers here were routine Hart finalists, while neither Bossy nor Lindsay was ever a Hart finalist. Edit: correction: Bobby finished 3rd once.

Okay, Makarov might not have been "better" than Bossy per say, but he did his thing for longer, right? (I fully realize that I may be in a distinct minority by starting off with Makarov just a tad over Bossy).

 

[plusandminus]

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:

Mike Bossy
Bill Cook
Gordie Howe
Bobby Hull
Jaromir Jagr
Guy Lafleur
Ted Lindsay
Sergei Makarov
Maurice Richard

As usual these projects are very interesting and educating.

I don't know as much about Lindsey as I do about Makarov, but I see some similarities in career length and All Star Team nominations.
Lindsey's best scoring finishes were: 1,2,2,2,3,3,7,9.
Makarov's best scoring finishes are like: 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2(?).
A question might be how the Soviet league of the 80s compares to the NHL of the 50s. I think they might have been about as competitive. What do you others think?

Thus I would rank Makarov higher than Lindsey.

Having seen both Makarov and Bossy in the Canada Cups (and both also in other environments), I rate Makarov clearly ahead of Bossy. In my opinion it is clearly visible when watching them play. Makarov was clearly the better overall player.

 

[plusandminus]

Good post as usual TDMM... I have one remark...

Okay, Makarov might not have been "better" than Bossy per say, but he did his thing for longer, right? (I fully realize that I may be in a distinct minority by starting off with Makarov just a tad over Bossy).

It's almost as if you apologize for (if) ranking Makarov above Bossy, and as if it is important for you to vote similar to the others.
As a European, I can tell you that it's not at all controversial. I guess that a large majority of us would rate Makarov above Bossy. Different perspectives I suppose. But what can be done successfully, is to look at their performances during for example Canada Cups. If doing so, I think even most of the North Americans who witnessed them at the time would think of Makarov as the overall better of the two.
So... probably better peak/prime, and better longevity.

I would honestly want a fair comparison between Makarov, Hull and especially Richard. Was Richard's NHL really more competitive than Makarov's USSR league? Was Makarov a better overall player? Did Makarov prove himself in more environments?

I also see nothing controversial with having Jagr as a top-4 candidate.

While I hope attention is being paid to each others arguments, I hope no one thinks of this project as some kind of competition of voting as similar to the end result as possible.

 

[seventieslord]

I don't see how Bill Cook is any worse than the 5th most dominant winger of all-time according to how he dominated his own peers. The only arguments put forward to bring him down below that are going to be era-related. Some will be legitimate, many far-fetched.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't see how Bill Cook is any worse than the 5th most dominant winger of all-time according to how he dominated his own peers. The only arguments put forward to bring him down below that are going to be era-related. Some will be legitimate, many far-fetched.

The case for Lafleur over Cook boils down to playoffs. Bill Cook's playoff performances were pretty typical for a superstar of his era, but he didn't really go above and beyond like Lafleur did. Cook does have a pretty large advantage in longevity over Lafleur though.

I think the better question for this round - is there a case for him (or anyone else) to break into the top 4?

 

[DaveG]

Cook vs Jagr is an interesting debate for here. Just how dominant was Cook? I think we've all seen Jagr at his best here and seen what he's capable of, but on the other hand we've also seen him be the NHL's answer to Manny being Manny at times. I know I underrate him from an all-time perspective compared to a lot of people, but it's a debate worth having IMO.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top 5 and Top 10 NHL point scoring finishes 1926-27 to 2013-14

Why start in 1926-27? It is the first year after the last Western league folded, when the NHL contained all the talent in North America.

Why top ten finishes, rather than top twenty? Two reasons:

1) In a smaller league, I think 11th-20th place finishes start to become less meaningful. In the Original 6 period, teams usually only ran one powerplay unit for the entire powerplay, so there were only 18 forwards getting first unit powerplay time (plus a few extra forwards who would play on the point). So lower top 20 finishes in a smaller league were as much about opportunity as talent.

2) Not a small reason - top ten finishes are much easier to compile using hockey-reference.com.

I am giving players a point for every top 5 finish and a point for every top 10 finish. It's something of a junk stat that is useful for sorting.

PLAYER | TOP 5- | TOP 10 | TOTAL
Gordie Howe | 20 | 21 | 41
Maurice Richard | 9 | 11 | 20
Bobby Hull | 8 | 11 | 19
Jaromir Jagr | 8 | 11 | 19
Andy Bathgate | 9 | 9 | 18
Ted Lindsay | 6 | 8 | 14
Mike Bossy | 6 | 8 | 14
Guy Lafleur | 6 | 6 | 12
Bill Cook** | 5 | 7 | 12
Alex Ovechkin | 5 | 7 | 12
Teemu Selanne | 4 | 7 | 11

Notes:

• The ratio of goals to assists has remained fairly constant since World War 2. Prior to World War 2, the numbers varied, but there were fewer assists given out per goal than today. So looking at points will probably underrate the offensive contributions of pre-WW2 playmakers and overrate the offensive contributions of pre-WW2 goalscorers.
• **Bill Cook had significant seasons in the WCHL, including two scoring titles, before it folded.
• Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull had a few Top 10 seasons in the WHA as older players.

Top 20 NHL scoring finishes 1966-67 to 2013-14

Once again, remember that competition matters. In years of greater competition, a 20th place finish may actually be closer to 1st or 2nd place than a 10th place finish in years of weaker competition.

Like above, we are using something of a junk stat for sorting - adding together the number of top 5, top 10, top 15, and top 20 finishes.

PLAYER | TOP 5- | TOP 10 | TOP 15 | TOP 20 | TOTAL
Jaromir Jagr | 8 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 44
Mike Bossy | 5 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 31
Teemu Selanne | 4 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 30
Alex Ovechkin | 5 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 28
Jari Kurri | 3 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 24
Guy Lafleur | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 24
Martin St. Louis | 4 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 24

Notice that Guy Lafleur was top 5 for 6 straight seasons, but never top 20 outside this time.

Jagr pretty much dominates the other post-expansion forwards by this (regular season only) measure.



NHL Top 5/10 GOAL scoring finishes 1926-27 to 2013-14

Since in modern times, the primary job of a winger is often to score goals, and because goals have been statistically more valuable than assists since the 1940s, I thought it might be useful to make a table only focusing on goal scoring.

PLAYER | TOP 5- | TOP 10 | TOTAL
Gordie Howe | 14 | 19 | 33
Maurice Richard | 12 | 13 | 25
Bobby Hull# | 12 | 13 | 25
Mike Bossy | 8 | 9 | 17
Alex Ovechkin | 8 | 8 | 16
Ted Lindsay | 5 | 10 | 15
Roy Conacher | 6 | 8 | 14
Bernie Geoffrion | 6 | 8 | 14
Frank Mahovlich | 6 | 8 | 14
Jaromir Jagr | 6 | 8 | 14
Bill Cook** | 5 | 8 | 13
Brett Hull | 4 | 8 | 12
Ilya Kovalchuk | 4 | 8 | 12
Bryan Hextall, Sr | 5 | 6 | 11
Gordie Drillon | 5 | 6 | 11
Guy Lafleur | 5 | 6 | 11
Teemu Selanne | 5 | 6 | 11
Luc Robitaille | 2 | 9 | 11

**Bill Cook had some prime seasons in the WCHL, a rival to the NHL .
#Bobby Hull had some productive seasons in the WHA

 

[unknown33]

Tend to favour Hull, Jagr and Richard for the 2nd to 4th - order can go any way for me.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top 5 in Hart voting 1923-24 to 2013-14

For a couple of years in 1930s, we only have top 3 or 4, but for the most part, this is complete.

Player|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|Total
Gordie Howe | 6 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 16
Bobby Hull | 2 | 2 | 4| 0 | 1 | 9
Jaromir Jagr | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 |0 | 7
Guy Lafleur | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6
Maurice Richard | 1 | 2 | 3 |0 | 0 | 6
Alexander Ovechkin | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4
Andy Bathgate | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4
...
Bill Cook** | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
Mike Bossy | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2
Ted Lindsay | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2

**Again, part of Cook's prime was spent in the WHA. And for what it's worth, he also played in an era when defensemen were more likely to take Hart votes away from forwards than the rest of these guys. His two runner up finishes were to Herb Gardiner and Eddie Shore.

 

[plusandminus]

Yes, Hull was productive in the WHA. But even more productive in the Soviet league was Makarov, right? Scoring champion 9 seasons out of 10. MVP several times, "All Star Team" even more times.

 

[MXD]

Vote 1 will begin now and debates are scheduled to run through Sunday Sep 21 and 9 PM EST. You may PM votes to Hawkey Town 18 starting on Saturday, Sep 20.

We will be sending out confirmations when we receive ballots from the voters. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume we never received it and should resubmit it and post in this thread saying they did so.

Vote 1 will be for places 1 through 4 (4 places) on the Top 60 list.

There are 9 eligible candidates for Vote 1. You will still only rank your Top 8 when voting.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:

Mike Bossy
Bill Cook
Gordie Howe
Bobby Hull
Jaromir Jagr
Guy Lafleur
Ted Lindsay
Sergei Makarov
Maurice Richard

In this round, for me...

The fun will be for 2nd/3rd, and 5th to 7th.

I don't see how Bill Cook is any worse than the 5th most dominant winger of all-time according to how he dominated his own peers. The only arguments put forward to bring him down below that are going to be era-related. Some will be legitimate, many far-fetched.

I've been vocal for Cook for intial voting. I just see 5th (and NOT below) as either extremely generous to Cook, or a little harsh on the ... well, your 6th and 7th guy.

The argument vs. Lafleur is easy to grasp, mainly because the era argument against Cook can be somewhat nullified by the fact Lafleur didn't play in the best era.

Vs. Makarov? I can certainly understand the longevity argument. Kindof hard guys to compare.

Either way... My point was more : "**** below 5" is arguable, as opposed to "Cook is below 5".

 

[MXD]

Either way... My point was more : "**** below 5" is arguable, as opposed to "Cook is below 5".

First post, first stupid typo.

 

[Theokritos]

Was Richard's NHL really tougher than Makarov's USSR league?

Could you define tougher in this context?

 

[plusandminus]

Could you define tougher in this context?

Thank you for asking.
I mean competitive. (Nothing to do with physical toughness. I may edit.)

 

[MXD]

The case for Lafleur over Cook boils down to playoffs. Bill Cook's playoff performances were pretty typical for a superstar of his era, but he didn't really go above and beyond like Lafleur did. Cook does have a pretty large advantage in longevity over Lafleur though.

I think the better question for this round - is there a case for him (or anyone else) to break into the top 4?

Lafleur, Makarov I suppose. Don't count on me to make those cases, though.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't know as much about Lindsey as I do about Makarov, but I see some similarities in career length and All Star Team nominations.
Lindsey's best scoring finishes were: 1,2,2,2,3,3,7,9.
Makarov's best scoring finishes are like: 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2(?).
A question might be how the Soviet league of the 80s compares to the NHL of the 50s. I think they might have been about as competitive. What do you others think?

"Competitive" is not the word I'd use to describe the Soviet league in the 80s, considering the Red Army team had the right to poach any player they wanted from any other team in the league, a power that the all-powerful Tikhonov was not shy about using. I mean, Makarov still outscored his teammates on that stacked team by a wide margin domestically, but I don't think you can just compare his scoring numbers to the NHL at any point, really.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Thank you for asking.
I mean competitive. (Nothing to do with physical toughness. I may edit.)

Don't know much about how competitive the Soviet league was during Makarov's time.

Did he play with Larionov, Krutov, Fetisov and Kasatonov in the Soviet league also?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Bill Cook

I don't see how Bill Cook is any worse than the 5th most dominant winger of all-time according to how he dominated his own peers. The only arguments put forward to bring him down below that are going to be era-related. Some will be legitimate, many far-fetched.

Depending on how time lost to WWI is considered, at least five seasons.

Bill Cook only started in the WCHL at age 26.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/c/cookbi01.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cook

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

"Competitive" is not the word I'd use to describe the Soviet league in the 80s, considering the Red Army team had the right to poach any player they wanted from any other team in the league, a power that the all-powerful Tikhonov was not shy about using. I mean, Makarov still outscored his teammates on that stacked team by a wide margin domestically, but I don't think you can just compare his scoring numbers to the NHL at any point, really.

From 1977-1989 (Makarov's time in Russia), CSKA Moscow won the title every single time. There is no way that the Soviet league was as competitive as the NHL during Richard's time, or at any point in the history of the NHL actually.

 

[Theokritos]

I mean competitive.

The answer is basically this:

"Competitive" is not the word I'd use to describe the Soviet league in the 80s

and this:

There is no way that the Soviet league was as competitive as the NHL during Richard's time, or at any point in the history of the NHL actually.

Some numbers:

Best domestic teams (regular season/group stage)..

...during Maurice Richard's prime:
1944-45: Canadiens 80/100 points = 80.0 %, GD: +107/50 = +2.1 per game
1945-46: Canadiens 61/100 points = 61.0 %, GD: +38/50 = +0.8 per game
1946-47: Canadiens 78/120 points = 65.0 %, GD: +51/60 = +0.9 per game
1947-48: Maple Leafs 77/120 points = 64.2 %, GD: +39/60 = +0.7 per game
1948-49: Red Wings 75/120 points = 62.5 %, GD: +50/60 = +0.8 per game
1949-50: Red Wings 88/140 points = 62.9 %, GD: +65/70 = +0.9 per game
1950-51: Red Wings 101/140 points = 72.1 %, GD: +97/70 = +1.4 per game
1951-52: Red Wings 100/140 points = 71.4 %, GD: +82/70 = +1.2 per game
1952-53: Red Wings 90/140 points = 63.3 %, GD: +89/70 = +1.3 per game
1953-54: Red Wings 88/140 points = 62.9 %, GD: +59/70 = +0.8 per game
1954-55: Red Wings 95/140 points = 67.9 %, GD: +70/70 = +1.0 per game
1955-56: Canadiens 100/140 points = 71.4 %, GD: +91/70 = +1.3 per game
1956-57: Red Wings 88/140 points = 62.9 %, GD: +41/70 = +0.6 per game

...during Bobby Hull's prime:
1959-60: Canadiens 92/140 points = 65.7 %, GD: +77/70 = +1.1 per game
1960-61: Canadiens 92/140 points = 65.7 %, GD: +66/70 = +0.9 per game
1961-62: Canadiens 98/140 points = 70.0 %, GD: +93/70 = +1.3 per game
1962-63: Maple Leafs 82/140 points = 58.6 %, GD: +41/70 = +0.6 per game
1963-64: Canadiens 85/140 points = 60.7 %, GD: +42/70 = +0.6 per game
1964-65: Red Wings 87/140 points = 62.1 %, GD: +49/70 = +0.7 per game
1965-66: Canadiens 90/140 points = 64.3 %, GD: +66/70 = +0.9 per game
1966-67: Black Hawks 94/140 points = 67.1 %, GD: +94/70 = +1.3 per game
1967-68: Canadiens 94/148 points = 63.5 %, GD: +69/74 = +0.9 per game
1968-69: Canadiens 103/152 points = 67.8 %, GD: +69/76 = +0.9 per game
1969-70: Black Hawks 99/152 points = 65.1 %, GD: +80/76 = +1.1 per game
1970-71: Bruins 121/156 points = 77.6 %, GD: +192/78 = +2.5 per game
1972-72: Bruins 119/156 points = 76.3 %, GD: +126/78 = +1.6 per game

...during Sergei Makarov's prime:
1978-79: CSKA 72/88 points = 81.8 %, GD: +146/44 = +3.3 per game
1979-80: CSKA 80/88 points = 90.9 %, GD: +188/44 = +4.3 per game
1980-81: CSKA 77/88 points = 87.5 %, GD: +170/44 = +3.9 per game
1981-82: CSKA 78/88 points = 88.6 %, GD: +165/44 = +3.8 per game
1982-83: CSKA 81/88 points = 92.0 %, GD: +188/44 = +4.3 per game
1983-84: CSKA 86/88 points = 97.7 %, GD: +206/44 = +4.7 per game
1984-85: CSKA 68/80 points = 85.0 %, GD: +186/40 = +4.7 per game
1985-86: CSKA 69/80 points = 86.3 %, GD: +140/40 = +3.5 per game
1986-87: CSKA 74/80 points = 92.5 %, GD: +143/40 = +3.6 per game
1987-88: CSKA 71/88 points = 80.7 %, GD: +119/44 = +2.7 per game
1988-89: CSKA 89/124 points = 71.8 %, GD: +129/62 = +2.1 per game

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I have megaposts on Bill Cook and Sergei Makarov ready to go, but I was planning on waiting until next round, when I think they are pretty strong candidates for spots 5 and 6. For now, I'll post Bill Cook's statistical record in the WCHL just to get a sense of what he was doing before he joined the NHL at the age of 30.

Bill Cook by the stats

WCHL career (ages 26-29)

1923 (age 26): 8th in WCHL scoring when probably about 1/4 of the overall North American talent was in the WCHL. Good, not great. This was Bill Cook's first professional season.

1924 (age 27): led the WCHL in goals, assists, and points. The WCHL had surpassed the PCHA by this point - the two leagues played an interlocking schedule and Cook led the combined leagues in scoring. The NHL still had about half the talent, however (maybe slightly less). Cook led his league in scoring 40-34 (by 18%), the widest margin of any of the leaders. A decent chance of being the Art Ross winner in a consolidated league.

1925 (age 28): Missed 3 games and finished 1 point behind the two players who tied for the scoring championship. 3rd in points and goals, 5th in assists.

1926 (age 29): led the WCHL (now called WHL) in points and goals by very large margins (6th in assists). Almost certainly the Art Ross winner in a consolidated league.

After 1926, the WHL folded and the best players joined the NHL. Led by Bill Cook former WHL players were all over the NHL scoring boards. 3 of the top 4, 6 of the top 10, and 11 of the top 20 NHL scorers in 1927 had spent the previous year in the WHL.

Overall Points: 8th (1923), 1st (1924), 3rd (1925), 1st (1926)
Overall Goals: 1st (1924), 3rd (1925), 1st (1926)
Overall Assists: 1st (1924), 5th (1925), 6th (1926)

NHL career(ages 30-40)

Points: 1st (1927), 10th (1928), 7th (1929), 4th (1930), 4th (1931), 4th (1932), 1st (1933)

Goals: 1st (1927), 10th (1928), 6th (1929), 6th (1930), 2nd (1931), 1st (1932), 1st (1933), 5th (1935)

Assists: 8th (1929), 3rd (1930), 6th (1933)

____________

Anyway, there you have it - Bill Cook likely wins 3-4 Art Rosses if he played his entire career in a consolidated league.