First 14 Seasons: Crosby vs. Howe

[daver]

I'm not saying there's an agenda.

I agree that counting top ppg finishes across eras benefits older eras. Just like - it's easier to finish top 2 AS teams when you're realistically competing against 3-5 star players, vs 10-12 in today's bigger league.

Bottom line is - you're not comparing Howe's first 14 years to Beliveau's first 14 years. You're comparing Howe's first 14 years to a "random sample of years from Beliveau". Which, skews the results, depending on which set of years from Beliveau's (and all other players being compared) career are picked.

Again, the point is to show that whatever players were at the top of the league in scoring over a particular timeframe, the statistical reality is that they will show more impressive Art Ross finishes in a league with five times less players than there modern counterparts.

That's it. We can remove all the names if that would make it easier to see this.

 

[daver]

One big issue with my/this model is this:

56	1963-64	NHL	210	2.78	0.57	3.64	15.69	84.31	32.8	30.0	.916	2.75
57	1962-63	NHL	210	2.97					31.8	28.9	.908	2.93
58	1961-62	NHL	210	3.01					31.6	28.7	.906	2.98
59	1960-61	NHL	210	3.00					32.2	29.2	.908	2.96
60	1959-60	NHL	210	2.95					31.6	28.7	.908	2.92
Rk	Season	Lg	GP	G	PP	PPO	PP%	PK%	SA	SV	SV%	GAA
61	1958-59	NHL	210	2.90					30.3	27.4	.905	2.87
62	1957-58	NHL	210	2.80					30.4	27.6	.909	2.78
63	1956-57	NHL	210	2.69					29.8	27.1	.911	2.65
64	1955-56	NHL	210	2.53					30.8	28.3	.919	2.49
65	1954-55	NHL	210	2.52								2.52
66	1953-54	NHL	210	2.40								2.37
67	1952-53	NHL	210	2.40								2.37
68	1951-52	NHL	210	2.60								2.56
69	1950-51	NHL	210	2.71								2.70
70	1949-50	NHL	210	2.73								2.73
71	1948-49	NHL	180	2.72								2.72
72	1947-48	NHL	180	2.93								2.93
73	1946-47	NHL	180	3.16								3.16
74	1945-46	NHL	150	3.34								3.34

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Howe peak is in a much lower scoring era from that time frame, certain player have an higher % of games in an higher scoring era than Howe (Beliveau really start in 54-55 for example has it goes up).


There is so little players that player those 14 season to make a comparison with Howe that it is hard to judge him, being able to play so much game in that era put him in an elite category of is own by itself.

I have no issue with judging Howe as clearly being on another level from Beliveau. That wasn't the point of the stats. What I am arguing is that Crosby is closer to Howe's level than Beliveau or Hull despite their similar PPG and raw point finishes.

 

[daver]

The fact that you continue to compare the PPG stats of players who only played in the higher scoring late 50s with Gordie Howe - who played through the whole decade - proves something, but not about Gordie Howe.

Where am I arguing that Beliveau is on Howe's level? You are completely missing the point I was making; a point that can be made without mentioning player names.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Crosby is closer to Howe than Belivea/Hull?

I've heard it all!

I'm sure there is a way to spin him being in the same ballpark as Bobby Orr. If it hasn't been done, why not throw that out in this thread.

 

[MXD]

Crosby is closer to Howe than Belivea/Hull?

I've heard it all!

That's pretty much basic Argumentum Ex Culo.

 

[wetcoast]

I don't think Sid can do anything to catch Howe a regular season player goes. It's impossible, short of him winning 3-4 more Harts, scoring titles, etc from here on out and I, being a massive Crosby fan, would be willing to bet my house and job that doesn't happen. Besides, we should be looking at what players have done. Not what they might do in the future.

As far as postseason, Sid could pass Howe. I think that is much more attainable but as of now, he's still a good ways short.

I honestly don't think that you can say that Howe has any sort of advatnage in the playoffs if one accounts for the differences in era, ie 6 teams to 30 teams plus, salary cap, player movement ect....

Here is how each player compares to their peers (Crosby in his 14 year career and Howe in his pre WHA career years before the NHL).

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

It's not really clear that Howe has any edge here does it?

Of course people are going to point to the number of times Howe led the NHL playoffs in scoring but with only 4 teams and 2 rounds in every year of Howe expect for his final playoff year one does have to makes some account for the state of the NHL and the playoff structure as well.

I think the distance that Crosby has has on the field is more impressive than Howe.

 

[wetcoast]

Crosby is closer to Howe than Belivea/Hull?

I've heard it all!

I'm sure there is a way to spin him being in the same ballpark as Bobby Orr. If it hasn't been done, why not throw that out in this thread.

If you want to go down that road there is actually a very good argument for it.

 

[daver]

If you want to go down that road there is actually a very good argument for it.

Based on the reactions by some I would say that people are pretty set in their ways to even broach the topic.

The OP is about their first 14 seasons/by age 31, so there really shouldn't be that much resistance to an objective discussion even if the answer is clearly Howe given Crosby's injuries.

It is very telling that noone wants to acknowledge Crosby's similar PPG dominance (one that is still similar vs. Howe's best 14 season stretch) nor acknowledge that Crosby's playoff resume is as dominant and as befitting his regular season status. His scoring finishes, let alone his PPG finishes, are closer to Howe's vs. his modern peers, than Hull's and Beliveau's were vs. their peers.

I really don't understand why it should be surprising to anyone that Crosby has had a career to date that should be easily considered as pacing for #5 all-time. He was as much a prodigy as a youth and as a junior player as Wayne and Mario were, had the 2nd highest scoring finish by an 18 year old in NHL history and he became the only teenager in North American sports history to win a scoring title. It was perhaps surprising he didn't seem to step things up in the regular season until his 6th year but then he already had two Cup runs by that time.

 

[daver]

I honestly don't think that you can say that Howe has any sort of advatnage in the playoffs if one accounts for the differences in era, ie 6 teams to 30 teams plus, salary cap, player movement ect....

Here is how each player compares to their peers (Crosby in his 14 year career and Howe in his pre WHA career years before the NHL).

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

It's not really clear that Howe has any edge here does it?

Of course people are going to point to the number of times Howe led the NHL playoffs in scoring but with only 4 teams and 2 rounds in every year of Howe expect for his final playoff year one does have to makes some account for the state of the NHL and the playoff structure as well.

I think the distance that Crosby has has on the field is more impressive than Howe.

Yeah, "a good ways short" seems to be unreasonable given the similar stats (leading era scorers, leading PPG, multiple Top Ten point totals for their eras, multiple elite PPG runs for non Cup runs). Crosby already has four Cup runs (the equivalent of an O6 Cup win) that were Conn Smythe worthy vs. Howe's 2 or 3. That the Wings won a Cup with little contribution from Howe should be a plus to Crosby as is Crosby's international resume; the best player for Canada over the last three best-on-best tourneys.

As I have said before, any doubts that Crosby is hanging with a prime Howe offensively on a per game basis should be put to rest given their similar playoff domination.

 

[ImporterExporter]

PPG dominance as if points are the only way to evaluate the dominance of a hockey player.

Howe dominated everywhere on the ice. His status all time goes well beyond raw/adjusted points totals.

 

[daver]

PPG dominance as if points are the only way to evaluate the dominance of a hockey player.

Howe dominated everywhere on the ice. His status all time goes well beyond raw/adjusted points totals.

So you are in agreement that their offensive levels are similar? You don't seem to want to acknowledge that for some reason. When talk specific to the offensive side of things seems to point towards some similarities the "Howe was so much more than points!" narrative starts coming out. Not sure why this seems to be a trigger for some.

And, as you like to frame it, what did Howe's domination "everywhere" do for his team's success? Four cups, one of which he contributed little to, in 24 years is hardly anything to write home about. Crosby is the biggest winner of his era when you factor in his Cups and international wins and individual contribution to those championships.

I have no issue with Howe's all around game being held in high regard, Crosby's all around game is also certainly impressive in comparison to the Top 10 to 15 players. What about his leadership? Beliveau seems to be given a few extra points for his leadership, why not Crosby in comparison to Howe?

 

[ImporterExporter]

So you are in agreement that their offensive levels are similar? You don't seem to want to acknowledge that for some reason.

And, as you like to frame it, what did Howe's domination "everywhere" do for his team's success? Four cups, one of which he contributed little to, in 24 years is hardly anything to write home about. Crosby is the biggest winner of his era when you factor in his Cups and international wins and individual contribution to those championships.

I have no issue with Howe's all around game being held in high regard, Crosby's all around game is also certainly impressive in comparison to the Top 10 to 15 players. What about his leadership? Beliveau seems to be given a few extra points for his leadership, why not Crosby in comparison to Howe?

Dude, I'm about the biggest Crosby fan in the world (ok, a stretch, but he's easily my favorite player of all time). Hockey could not have a better role model or ambassador for the game today. He's lived up the insane hype and seemingly is still playing at an all time level post 30.

With that being said, no I don't think Crosby and Howe are similar offensively. I think Howe is a full notch above Sid. Howe simply dominated people more than Sid has. By age 28 Howe had 5 scoring titles, 4 goal scoring titles, 3 assist titles and that was a time period that overlapped with Beliveau, Richard, Harvey, Horton, Gadsby, etc, etc. He faced stiffer competition for supremacy.

Goals per game in the league between the early to late 50's were between 2.4 and 2.9. When Crosby broke into the league it was just over 3.

There is no way to get Sid on or near the level of Howe as a regular season player. None.

Now, if you want to talk playoffs, then there is at least a debate to be had and if we're talking potential, then sure Sid could pass Howe in that department. I honestly think a 4th Cup and 3rd Smythe (especially if it's more like 2008, 2009 or 2017) would put him into the top 5 postseason players ever.

 

[daver]

Dude, I'm about the biggest Crosby fan in the world (ok, a stretch, but he's easily my favorite player of all time). Hockey could not have a better role model or ambassador for the game today. He's lived up the insane hype and seemingly is still playing at an all time level post 30.

With that being said, no I don't think Crosby and Howe are similar offensively. I think Howe is a full notch above Sid. Howe simply dominated people more than Sid has. By age 28 Howe had 5 scoring titles, 4 goal scoring titles, 3 assist titles and that was a time period that overlapped with Beliveau, Richard, Harvey, Horton, Gadsby, etc, etc. He faced stiffer competition for supremacy.

Based on what exactly? Since you think that trophy counting is the be all, end all, Richard did not win the Ross once and Beliveau, who Howe did not even face at his peak, won it once.

The stats show that their respective peer groups were similar. We aren't talking about either of them going up against Wayne or Mario, the only two players who were guaranteed of wining the Ross in their prime when healthy.

How convenient that "competition" all of sudden gets thrown out when there is a reasonable statistical debate to be had. The idea that Howe, at his peak, got to face easier defensive teams than Crosby seems to be a more reasonable argument to make. Or that Howe did not have great competition during his peak, as when he did after his peak, he wasn't winning Art Rosses as much and in as dominating a fashion.

 

[daver]

Goals per game in the league between the early to late 50's were between 2.4 and 2.9. When Crosby broke into the league it was just over 3.

So what? Noone is arguing total points. The argument is performance vs. a reasonable sample of their respective peer groups.