GOAT goalscorer?

[daver]

It's Wayne Gretzky.

Just imagine if he decided he didn't want to be the greatest playmaker?

Even as the greatest playmaker, he leads the regular season and playoffs in all-time goals.

It's all absurd. Don't overthink it, folks.

I agree that Wayne and Mario will always deserve some benefit of the doubt as they clearly stood above everyone else as overall offensive forces. In no way, shape, or form do players Hull or OV have an advantage over those in the goalscoring department in assessing them as players.

With that context in place, one can look at this topic by the numbers and have an interesting discussion.

 

[wetcoast]

Gartner "compiled" rather decent 627 assists to go with his goals and never led the league in shots on goal, unlike the unselfish Gretzky a number of times.

Wow I had to read this twice and the obvious conclusion isn't accuracy but rather absurdity in calling Gretzky a selfish player.

 

[Hippasus]

That would challenge OV's season, as would Stamkos' 60 goals.

Here is how those three stack up:

% over 2nd place:

Bure - 32%
OV - 25 %
Stamkos - 20%

% over 2nd place in GPG (among Top 10 goalscorers):

OV - 20%
Bure - 16%
Stamkos - 9%

% over avg. of other Top Ten goalscorers:

Stamkos - 54%
OV - 48%
Bure - 43%

% over avg. of other Top Ten goalscorers' GPG:

Stamkos - 49%
Bure - 47%
OV - 39%

All three of those seasons have a claim as best in the past 20 years, all things considered. OV had the highest total and best GPG gap, Bure had the biggest % raw gap in goals but benefited from Jagr missing games, Stamkos had to go against one of the best goalscoring seasons of his era from Malkin but separated himself the most from the pack.

They likely would not crack the Top 5 all-time, or even Top Ten, all things considered. This, IMO, would potentially keep OV from being considered the consensus all-time best.

I agree that Wayne and Mario will always deserve some benefit of the doubt as they clearly stood above everyone else as overall offensive forces. In no way, shape, or form do players Hull or OV have an advantage over those in the goalscoring department in assessing them as players.

With that context in place, one can look at this topic by the numbers and have an interesting discussion.

I disagree that Ovechkin would be disqualified for all-time best goal scorer for not having one of the best seasons. 07-08 is up there according to my study. See post 528 on page 22 in this thread.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

I disagree that Ovechkin would be disqualified for all-time best goal scorer for not having one of the best seasons. 07-08 is up there according to my study. See post 528 on page 22 in this thread.

To me, 20007-2008 should ranked much higher than 9th, it's in the top 3 or 4 imo. If not the best.

 

[daver]

To me, 20007-2008 should ranked much higher than 9th, it's in the top 3 or 4 imo. If not the best.

Based on what? Lots of other seasons were more statistically dominant.

 

[Fantomas]

I was thinking about OV's eight Rocket titles vs. Hull's seven Rocket titles.

It's interesting how every time daver is 'thinking' about Ovechkin he always reaches the same conclusion.

 

[Hippasus]

To me, 20007-2008 should ranked much higher than 9th, it's in the top 3 or 4 imo. If not the best.

If one adjusts goals to a given league-wide goal rate like Hockey Reference does, Ovechkin's big season indeed ranks about that high. The problem though is that method unfairly deflates the top scorers circa 80s and 90s because that is when secondary or depth scoring became a more significant factor.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

If one adjusts goals to a given league-wide goal rate like Hockey Reference does, Ovechkin's big season indeed ranks about that high. The problem though is that method unfairly deflates the top scorers circa 80s and 90s because that is when secondary or depth scoring became a more significant factor.

I don't need hockey reference to understand that 65 goals in 2007-2008 is not far behind 92 goals in the early 80's. I think it's easily as impressive, maybe more so.

 

[daver]

I don't need hockey reference to understand that 65 goals in 2007-2008 is not far behind 92 goals in the early 80's. I think it's easily as impressive, maybe more so.

You obviously have some basis for equalizing 65 with 92, what is that basis and how would you apply that same basis to the best goalscoring seasons by other players from other time periods?

In terms of the gap between the goals leader and the 2nd place, or the other Top 5 - 10 goalscorers, or the other first line players in the league, OV's season is not easily argued to be at the very top historically.

Any talk of it being harder now to score vs. previous eras needs to be tempered with the expectation that this current era will at some point become "days of yore" meaning crowning OV the GOAT will be a temporary title.

 

[Isles72]

some of these guys who played in the 50's through 70's had summer jobs to pay their mortgage

 

[BehindTheTimes]

I do agree that Brett Hull's 86 goal 90-91 season is likely number 1 imo, but he just doesn't have the longevity of Ovy has, so the idea that you need to have the best season to be number 1 doesn't hold any weight imo.

 

[daver]

I do agree that Brett Hull's 86 goal 90-91 season is likely number 1 imo, but he just doesn't have the longevity of Ovy has, so the idea that you need to have the best season to be number 1 doesn't hold any weight imo.

It should if you are being compared with a player who does have similar, or perhaps superior longevity/prime like Bobby Hull.