Are there players whose legacy changes with just a few points?

[VMBM]

Take a few points from Aleksander Yakushev in the 1972 Summit Series, and he most certainly is not in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

 

[DJ Man]

In 1952-53, Gordie Howe scored 49 goals in an extremely low-scoring season. Had he reached 50, then Geoffrion's 50 and Bobby Hull's 50 would have been less impressive.

 

[psycat]

Could we show some respect for Maurice Richard? Yeah, the first 50 goal season is cool but it's hardly the main reason he's a legend. He had, like, 13 great years after the war and retired as far and away the top goal scorer of all time.

Still overrated though, fringe top 20 player of all time. 0 Ross, 1 Hart, lot's of team success because he played on arguably the greatest powerhouse of all time. Yet I see people here rank him 5th all time and such. I mean there have been a lot of great players through the last 100 years or so, no slight towards him and I am sure he was a class act but see no real reason for ranking him any higher than(say) Mikita whom in turn is underrated.

 

[The Panther]

Still overrated though, fringe top 20 player of all time. 0 Ross, 1 Hart, lot's of team success because he played on arguably the greatest powerhouse of all time. Yet I see people here rank him 5th all time and such. I mean there have been a lot of great players through the last 100 years or so, no slight towards him and I am sure he was a class act but see no real reason for ranking him any higher than(say) Mikita whom in turn is underrated.

I have never seen anybody (except maybe Scotty Bowman) rank Richard as high as 5th all time, so I don't know where you're getting that from. Then again, Bowman might know a thing or two.

As far as team success goes, it's important to note that the Habs were not a powerhouse team when Richard joined and came to prominence in 1943-ish. In fact, the franchise was in danger of folding, but didn't, thanks to him. There were at least two great eras of Montreal clubs during his career. The powerhouse you refer to is likely the early to mid-50s and onward, when Richard was probably passing his physical prime.

It's true that he didn't win a scoring title, but, much like Bobby Hull or Ovechkin, Richard was never a superb playmaker or even a well-balanced scorer. Besides:
-- He would have won the '55 scoring title, but was suspended for the final few games (he might have been, at the time, the oldest player to win a scoring title).
-- Go back and look at how many times he was within a couple of points of winning the scoring title (he was 2nd to his linemate, Elmer Lach, in 1945). Consider also that Montreal gave out fewer assists than any other team at the time, and that the NHL executives, off-ice officials, etc., were blatantly biased against French-Canadians. It's quite possible that Richard should have won a few scoring titles.

-- The same applies to Hart voting, which was much less conservative then than now. Richard should have won two or three. There were some wonky choices back then.

Then, there are factors like:
-- Richard was fourteen times in a row a 1st/2nd team All Star. Six of those were 1st teams in a row, and 2 more were later in his career against prime Gordie Howe.
-- As mentioned, he ended as the #1 goal scorer in NHL history, by an enormous margin. When he finished in 1960, his 544 goals seemed to people more than Gretzky's 894 does today -- like an insurmountable total, never to be approached (then Howe kept going... and going).
-- Richard is almost certainly the greatest playoff goal-scorer of all time. I personally think he is on par with Gretzky as the greatest overall playoff performer ever.

Etc. Anyway, I also don't rank him as high as fifth, but he would be in my top ten or twelve. We all have our opinions.

 

[crobro]

Michel Goulet

Tim Kerr

Markus Naslund ie “we Choked”

 

[Albatros]

Gord Strate.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Off the top of my head (recent years) :

• Mario Lemieux 88/89 : 1 more points and becomes the 2nd player in history to hit 200 points in a season

• Wayne Gretzky’s 96/97 : 3 more points give him a 16th 100 points season by age of 36.

98/99 : 8 more points for Gretzky makes him the only player in history (I think) to record a point per game in 20 straight seasons.​

• Joe Sakic 00/01 - 4 more points gives him his first and only Art Ross win and one of the best overall season of all time.

• Jarome Iginla 01/02 : 4 more points gives him his first and only 100 points season.

• Jaromir Jagr 05/06 : 3 more points gives him a 6th Art Ross and tie Lemieux and Howe (2nd all time)

• Alex Ovechkin 08/09 : 4 more goals gives him a 2nd 60 goals seasons. Pretty impressive in the cap era

• Sidney Crosby 09/10 : 3 more points gives him the Art Ross

12-13 : 4 more points gives him the Art Ross
14/15 : 4 more points give him a 5th Art Ross (3rd all time)

In Crosby’s case, 10 points completely change his legacy​

• John Tavares 14/15 : 2 more points gives him his first Art Ross

• Evgeni Malkin 17/18 : 2 more points gives him a 4th 100 points season

 

[Big Phil]

Some of these are pretty good. I like Middleton with 988 points. This was a time when the NHL really obsessed over the 1,000 point barrier. This is why McDonald got in on his first try and Middleton still isn't in 27 years later. Honestly, was Lanny better than Middleton? Middleton was at LEAST Lanny's equal for his career and to be quite honest they are practically the same career-wise. But Nifty lacks that shiny number.

The Rocket with 49 goals in 1945. Does it change his legacy? Not really, but the whole 50-in-50 thing isn't really a "thing". In fact, we probably never think about it or bring it up. It was brought up because there were 50 games in a season in 1945. Two years later it was 60 games, 3 after that it was 70. So basically if Richard doesn't hit that 50 then no one thinks it is all that important. Bossy doing it in 1981 is nice but probably not something he is "gunning" for. Gretzky's 50-in-39 the year after is probably just something that we say "Wow, he had his 50th goal by his 39th game" instead of it being the standard for the last 4 decades.

Mario getting 200 points changes very little. Because he missed 4 games in 1989 as it was and he probably has that extra point by the 1st period if he plays one of those games. Plus in 1993 he is on pace for more than 200 and in 1996 he was awfully close to with a full season.

Markus Naslund and the 2003 Canucks come to mind though. Not only did he lose the Art Ross on the last weekend of the year but the Canucks also lost 1st place in their division which would have changed the playoff format. Who knows what happens then? But Naslund has an Art Ross and maybe if the Art Ross winner is on a team that beats the next best guy (Forsberg) he has a bit more mustard for the Hart. It's not crazy, because Naslund did win the Pearson that year.

Here is one not mentioned yet. Glenn Anderson gets two more goals at some point in his career and he has 500. It is just awkward with him at that 498 total.

On the flip side, remove 3 goals from Joe Mullen and he has 499. Does it change his HHOF status? I'd like to think we aren't so "nickel and dime" with that but perhaps it does.

 

[innitfam]

Sprinkle 20 odd points into Jagr's seasons where he failed to reach 100 points and suddenly he has 10 100-point seasons.

Add 4 goals to Ovechkin's sophomore year and 1 goal to 17-18 and he's at 9 50-goal seasons already.

On a lesser example, add a single point to Oates 99 point year in 91-92 and then he's got 5 straight 100 point seasons.

Legacies would change, although how they would is up to the individual player. For OV, if he already has 9 50 goal years, gets 50+ this year and nets two more 50 goal years, he sits at 12, alone in top spot by a good margin. If he retires with 800 goals (already a decent bet) and a dozen 50 goal seasons, he would definitely be the greatest goalscorer of all time.

 

[Sticks and Pucks]

Markus Naslund and the 2003 Canucks come to mind though. Not only did he lose the Art Ross on the last weekend of the year but the Canucks also lost 1st place in their division which would have changed the playoff format. Who knows what happens then? But Naslund has an Art Ross and maybe if the Art Ross winner is on a team that beats the next best guy (Forsberg) he has a bit more mustard for the Hart. It's not crazy, because Naslund did win the Pearson that year.

Yeah, Naslund was definitely expected to win the Hart until the last day of the season. IIRC, the Pearson voting took place before the season ended so that's why Naslund won.

 

[frisco]

Jaromir Jagr 05/06 : 3 more points gives him a 6th Art Ross and tie Lemieux and Howe (2nd all time)

Yes, and two goals of those extra three points give him a Richard trophy (lots of seconds but never won one). Also, he won the Pearson that year. An outright scoring title could've been enough to push him past Thornton in the Hart voting where he finished a pretty close second.

My Best-Carey

 

[HawkNut]

He's still a Hall of Famer, but when I think of Glenn Anderson, I can't help but think of 498.

 

[The Panther]

He's still a Hall of Famer, but when I think of Glenn Anderson, I can't help but think of 498.

It's a pity, because he came back to Edmonton in 1995-96 before Keenan claimed him on waivers in March '96 (you wonder why Keenan wanted him, when he was already looking kind of washed up in the '94 playoff run in New York). He had 4 goals and 10 points in 17 games back with the Oil, before slowing to 2 goals and 4 points in 15 with St.Louis. Had the Blues not grabbed him on waivers, it's quite possible he would have hit 500 in Edmonton. (He also finished 1 measly point shy of 1100.)

 

[Ofuzz]

If Paul Henderson scores just 3 less goals in 1972......................

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Owing to a thread I posted a while back, Chris Osgood's legacy certainly changes if the Wings score only two more goals to win the Cup in '09, giving him the Smythe.

 

[HawkNut]

It's a pity, because he came back to Edmonton in 1995-96 before Keenan claimed him on waivers in March '96 (you wonder why Keenan wanted him, when he was already looking kind of washed up in the '94 playoff run in New York). He had 4 goals and 10 points in 17 games back with the Oil, before slowing to 2 goals and 4 points in 15 with St.Louis. Had the Blues not grabbed him on waivers, it's quite possible he would have hit 500 in Edmonton. (He also finished 1 measly point shy of 1100.)

On the reverse side of this, Lanny McDonald stands out to me for having exactly 500 goals.

 

[Neonmile]

by the same token if corey perry scores one less goal, both sedins have hart trophies

What's really funny about this is during is hot streak in March one of those goals was on own goal by the opponents that was credited to Perry since he was de the last Ducks to touch the puck.



As for the subject of the topic:

If Dionne has 1 more points in 71-72 and 2 more in 87-88 he has 17 straight PPG seasons. **

If Messier has 1 more point in 84-85, he has 16 straight PPG season.*

If Sakic has 1 more in 97-98 and 3 more in 2001-02, he has 17 straight.

That's just a quick look, there are a few more example like this.

Similarly, since it is now widely accepted, (in analytics circles at least), that sh% fluctuation is largely random within a certain range for each players (that's not to say that they can't move that range or sh% around with change to their games), you can flip Ovechkin sh% from 2007-08 (14.6%) and 08-09 (10.6%) and he suddenly find himself with 47 goals in the former season, but 77 (!) in 79 games for the latter.


*Speaking of Messier, am I the only who's always been weirded out about how on the powerhouse Oilers in the high-flying 80's his career high was 50 goals, ans then in 95-96, in his mid-30'S, with lesser teammates and the league firmly transitioning into the dead-puck era, he scored 47 in 74? Kind of funny.

**Speaking of Dionne, just tought I'd mention this: last night Crosby clinched his 14 straight PPG season, while Ovechkin clinched his tenth 40 goals a couple weeks ago. They both become the 4th players in reach those mark and either case the first 3 are Gretzky, Lemieux and Dionne.

 

[The Panther]

*Speaking of Messier, am I the only who's always been weirded out about how on the powerhouse Oilers in the high-flying 80's his career high was 50 goals, ans then in 95-96, in his mid-30'S, with lesser teammates and the league firmly transitioning into the dead-puck era, he scored 47 in 74? Kind of funny.

I remember that 1995-96 season well because I was watching Mess's stats closely and thinking, "He's gonna hit 50 again!".

When Mess was really young and a winger, he did score 50, as you mention, in 1982, and 48 the next year. But once he transitioned to center, in a good season he would generally get 35 to 40 goals (excepting his career-best year, 1989-90, when he had 45).

So, his goal total that season was certainly unexpected, and especially since he was playing mostly with Verbeek (a sniper) and Graves (a goal-scorer).

Anyway, Mess scored 24 goals in the first 41 games and was going well. But then he scored 19 goals in the next 24 games! He got injured late in the season and missed 8 games, ending up with 47. He would have made it, which would have left a 14-year gap between his two 50-goal seasons...

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

Back to Bossy, HOF's overrated goal scorer. 2 more goals in his injury decimated last year would give him 40 ten years in a row.
No one has done this.

 

[Mulletman]

If Joe Malone had scored 6 more goals in his first NHL season he would've hit 50 goals in just 20 games. And by doing so he would've totally destroyed Maurice Rocket Richards entire legacy.

Don't think he could've done it? Malone had 3 5 goal games, 2 4 goal games and 2 3 goal games during the 20 games he played. But unfortunately he started floating towards the end of the regular season and went pointless in the last 2 games against the Senators after having 44 goals in just 18 games...

 

[The Panther]

Back to Bossy, HOF's overrated goal scorer. 2 more goals in his injury decimated last year would give him 40 ten years in a row.
No one has done this.

I think you're forgetting this guy, who did it 12 years in a row...

 

[The Panther]

If Joe Malone had scored 6 more goals in his first NHL season he would've hit 50 goals in just 20 games. And by doing so he would've totally destroyed Maurice Rocket Richards entire legacy.

 

[JackSlater]

I have never seen anybody (except maybe Scotty Bowman) rank Richard as high as 5th all time, so I don't know where you're getting that from. Then again, Bowman might know a thing or two.

When The Hockey News made its big list of the top 100 players Richard was fifth, and that's the most high profile list that's been done on the matter. It seemed for quite some time that the general hockey canon was that Richard was either fifth or just about fifth.

 

[Troubadour]

Jaromir Jagr 05/06 : 3 more points gives him a 6th Art Ross and tie Lemieux and Howe (2nd all time)

Jagr had many years like this.

95/96, if Lemieux does not sit out back to back games and Jagr does not get injured about ten games to go, he probably gets to 160s point-wise.

96/97, trails just 5 goals behind the retro-Richard Tkachuk (in 18 fewer games). Make him play 73 instead of 63 and he probably takes the Richard (although it's possible Lemieux scores more with Jagr aboard).

99/00, again, make him play 73 instead of 63 and he most likely takes the Hart. If he doesn't miss any games, based on the way he was going up until the injury, it's most likely his best season ever, possibly with the Richard on top of it all.

Jagr was neither as healthy nor as lucky as people sometimes think, and he lost games that cost his legacy a good deal of shine.

Personally, I'm bothered by 99/00 way more than by 05/06. I mean, halfway through, right before injury, he was on pace for 146 points.

At that stage of the league-wide scoring malaise, that would have been insane. I believe he would have slowed down, at least somewhat, but on the other hand, by then, the man had earned the benefit of the doubt. He was at his absolute best.

It rarely gets talked about, because unlike Sid, Jagr had plenty of other shiny-number seasons, but in a way, that was the breaking point of his legacy, and, I believe, a breaking point of his Pens days. That's whence the Hart vote from Pittsburgh-to-Pronger came, that's where Jagr lost his mojo for the Pens.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Rocket Richard scored exactly 50 goals in 1945 in a depleted NHL. He would never have more than 45 again.

How many times is he touted as the first to score 50 goals? (Never with an asterix for war years even though other players' accomplishments are often discounted due to reduced competition level - a pet peeve). One bloody goal makes all the difference.

Bernie "Boom Boom" Geoffrion would have gotten the "first to score 50 goals!" moniker for what he did in 1961.


"Ha ha. I had 50, not 49, against gimpy replacements, so your 50 ain't so significant, eh? Funny, no?"

LOL really...

50 in 50 is not the only one reason why Maurice Richard is a legend. Is it a big part of his legacy/legend? Sure! But he was much more than that.