Best Examples of Players Better And Worse Than Their Raw Scoring Numbers...

[GlitchMarner]

Fedorov has to be one of the best examples of a player significantly better than his scoring stats suggest.

Who are some players that the opposite is true about?

Click to read more...

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Phil Kessel

 

[VanIslander]

Better & worse?

Kimmo Timonen
Martin Gelinas

&

Paul Coffey
Alexei Yashin

 

[SniperHF]

Modano.

Perhaps cheating to name a defensive D, but Hjlamarsson is exceedingly impressive when you watch him every game for a few years.

 

[billybudd]

I don't think Fedorov was better than his numbers (which were fantastic, by the way).

Glen Murray was much worse than his numbers.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Kovalchuk was significantly worse than his numbers. Massive icetime, especially on the PP, on teams that tended to feed him the puck.

 

[JackSlater]

Housley and Esposito are worse than their numbers would indicate. Excluding players who were defensive specialists, and so not really judged by numbers anyway, Henri Richard and Dave Keon are better than their numbers indicate.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Tim Thomas and Roman Cechmanek...fringe NHLers that featured prominently for a short time and then washed out...

That Leafs dynasty team in the 60s had some players that deserve more recognition than their numbers suggest...Keon kind of gets his due, but Pulford, Armstrong, Horton, and Stanley do not relative to what you see on the ice from them...

 

[Vilica]

Housley and Esposito are worse than their numbers would indicate. Excluding players who were defensive specialists, and so not really judged by numbers anyway, Henri Richard and Dave Keon are better than their numbers indicate.

That Leafs dynasty team in the 60s had some players that deserve more recognition than their numbers suggest...Keon kind of gets his due, but Pulford, Armstrong, Horton, and Stanley do not relative to what you see on the ice from them...

Was Keon really better than his numbers? This is a loaded question (I have done some research into the underlying numbers), but compare Dave Keon's pre-expansion numbers (so 60-61 through 66-67) to Nicklas Backstrom's post-lockout numbers (so 13-14 through 18-19). Ignoring playoff results for the moment, so you're basing this entirely off regular season results/stats, which player had the better stretch? If you look at just raw numbers, Keon had 378 points in 472 games, compared to Backstrom's 458 points in 482 games, but obviously Backstrom has many more points on the power play compared to Keon, and there are a few more factors in Keon's favor as well.

Raw numbers aren't everything, but instead of/before I post the 5-6 paragraphs of analysis I performed on Keon/Backstrom, I thought I'd leave it open to the community, to solicit their opinion on both the Leafs/Capitals as well as Keon/Backstrom. What factors would lead you to say Keon was better, or are they close in value? I think it is fair to say that you can draw some fairly accurate conclusions, given that Toronto played 490 games over the seven seasons, and Washington played 492 over their six seasons.

 

[sr edler]

I don't think Fedorov was better than his numbers (which were fantastic, by the way).

OP probably not talking about 93–96 stretch but those 4 years thereafter when he didn't hit 70 points.

 

[Teamplaya]

Modano.

Perhaps cheating to name a defensive D, but Hjlamarsson is exceedingly impressive when you watch him every game for a few years.

Absolutely agree about Modano: seemed like one of his calling cards was being consistent and skilled with the puck all while getting the worst of 90's physicality getting thrown at him.

 

[billybudd]

OP probably not talking about 93–96 stretch but those 4 years thereafter when he didn't hit 70 points.

Fedorov was entering his late 20s (which is when offense begins to tail off...probably more significantly for Fedorov on account of his chain smoking), a lower scoring era and was missing 15-20 games in those year. His per-game production was in line with what he could do (offensively) during that time. Hardly anyone was going a point per game then, and the guys who were were usually better offensive players than him by that point. A 29 year-old Fedorov wasn't the scoring threat that a 24 year-old Paul Kariya was. The numbers don't mislead on that front; Kariya was a lot deadlier.

His worst year in that stretch (not including one where he missed 3/4 of the season), he was still the 13th-highest scorer at his position (some of the guys listed at center here actually played wing...usually with a more dangerous linemate than what Fedorov had). For a bad year, that's about right for what he could do at that time, and it's plenty impressive.

 

[sr edler]

Fedorov was a chain smoker?

 

[sr edler]

He also scored 80 points again in Detroit just when his usage changed after those seasons, so claiming Fedorov couldn't hit 70 points because he was a 29 year old chain smoker seems like a stretch.

 

[Big Phil]

Gilbert Perreault comes to mind. Playing on that small rink in Buffalo. Not that his stats aren't impressive, but in seeing him play you figure he gets more than 100+ points in a season more than just twice.

Mats Sundin as well. Remarkably consistent. Never had that winger to help him and was never blessed with a #2 centre behind him to take some pressure off of him. Carried a lot of load himself and did a lot of things right on the ice. Had a wicked backhand, excellent wrapping around the net, very strong on the puck, hard to knock off and yet almost never got clocked really hard despite being a big puck carrier. Only once the Matthews/Marner/Tavares era came did the Leafs have a player as good as he was.

I am going to go out on a limb here...............Brent Seabrook. Finished 13th in Norris voting, and that was his best. Watching his career, that just can't be right.

We know this already but the likes of Bergeron, Lemaire, Toews, etc.

I am going to throw one last name out there.............Alex Delvecchio

 

[Nick Hansen]

By the numbers, Peter Stastny was the second best scorer of the 80's.

 

[JackSlater]

Was Keon really better than his numbers? This is a loaded question (I have done some research into the underlying numbers), but compare Dave Keon's pre-expansion numbers (so 60-61 through 66-67) to Nicklas Backstrom's post-lockout numbers (so 13-14 through 18-19). Ignoring playoff results for the moment, so you're basing this entirely off regular season results/stats, which player had the better stretch? If you look at just raw numbers, Keon had 378 points in 472 games, compared to Backstrom's 458 points in 482 games, but obviously Backstrom has many more points on the power play compared to Keon, and there are a few more factors in Keon's favor as well.

Raw numbers aren't everything, but instead of/before I post the 5-6 paragraphs of analysis I performed on Keon/Backstrom, I thought I'd leave it open to the community, to solicit their opinion on both the Leafs/Capitals as well as Keon/Backstrom. What factors would lead you to say Keon was better, or are they close in value? I think it is fair to say that you can draw some fairly accurate conclusions, given that Toronto played 490 games over the seven seasons, and Washington played 492 over their six seasons.

What I was talking about was Keon's defence. Backstrom is fine defensively but Keon was for a time probably the best defensive forward in hockey. I don't know who would shake out better between Keon and Backstrom in a strictly offensive comparison, but I do think that Backstrom has benefited more from Ovechkin than Keon did from any teammate.

 

[danincanada]

Fedorov was a chain smoker?

I've never heard this claim either.

Source?

 

[scott clam]

Messier? Although his numbers say a lot...

 

[Neutrinos]

Roman Cechmanek

 

[Sentinel]

Kovalchuk was significantly worse than his numbers. Massive icetime, especially on the PP, on teams that tended to feed him the puck.

Because he usually played on very offensively minded teams. When needed be, he was at least competent defensively. It did take him a long time to learn to perform under pressure though.

 

[Sentinel]

Kuznetsov is a much better player than his numbers indicate who can never put together a truly stellar season

It's hard to be a worse Richard trophy winner than Johnathan Cheechoo.