How good was Mike Gartner in his prime?

[The Panther]

I suppose one point in his favour is that he played much of the 80s for a more defensive-minded team who did not offer great playmakers to feed him.

This is what I came in to say. Gartner's team was pretty terrible when he started in 1979-80, and when they started getting good about four years later they did so entirely by team defence. I mean, 1981-82 is the highest-scoring season in modern NHL history, and Gartner put up "only" 35 goals, and then, fourteen years later, in 1995-96, Gartner scored... 35 goals. I would in fact argue that if Gartner had played for any of several other clubs from 1979 to 1989, he likely would have scored more goals than he did.

 

[sr edler]

You can't judge the defensive capabilities of the 1992–93 Montreal Canadiens only by listing or naming their defensemen, and you can't judge the offensive capabilities of the 1980s Washington Capitals only by listing or naming their forwards. Defensemen and forwards does not appear in separate vacuums in hockey games. The 80s Capitals had 6 straight seasons of both Scott Stevens and Larry Murphy. 80s Scott Stevens was not post 1994 Devils Stevens and had seasons with 72, 68, 65, 61 and 53 points when Gartner was on the same team. In 86–87 Larry Murphy outscored Gartner by 8 points in the same-ish amount of games played.

A speedster like Michael Gartner probably benefited a bit more from good puck delivering/puck moving Ds too, more than from some slow ass puck dishing playmaking center like say Adam Oates, much like 1997–98 speedster RW Peter Bondra scored 50+ goals on the Capitals without playing much at all 5 on 5 with said Oates (and outscored Oates, in the regular season that is, even by PPG).

But lets do this time consuming thing anyways

1980: Gartner outscores Ryan Walter by 2 points
1981: Gartner is outscored by Dennis Maruk by 3 points
1982: Gartner is outscored by Dennis Maruk again, this time by 56 points. But even if we remove that outlier he's still outscored by Ryan Walter by 7 points (in two games less played by Walter too)
1983: Gartner is outscored by Maruk for a third time, by 5 points. This time though in 7 less games, meaning Gartner had a slightly better PPG this season than a relatively steeply declining Dennis Maruk (after his monster season)
1984: Gartner outscores Dave Christian by 4 points and B-Å Gustafsson by 10 (in 11 more games played by Gartner relative to Gustafsson though, so worse PPG than B-Å Gustafsson)
1985: Gartner outscores Bobby Carpenter by 7 points
1986: Gartner is outscored by Christian by 8 points (though in 6 more games played by Christian, but the same type of PPG)
1987: Gartner is outscored by Larry Murphy by 8 points (see paragraph above)
1988: Gartner outscores Scott Stevens by 9 points
1989: Gartner is traded from the Capitals with 55 points in 56 games. On the same team Mike Ridley finished with 89 points in 80 games, and Geoff Courtnall also sported PPG+ with 42 goals and 80 points in 79 games.

Summary:

x) not a single instance where Gartner outscores the next best point producer on his own team by more than 9 points. Next biggest margin is 7 points. Next biggest margins are 4 points ("kinda") and 2 points. Reversely he's twice outscored by 8 (Murphy) and 7 (Walter) points (not counting the season where he's outscored by very many many points by Dennis Maruk)

x) consistently on the same type of scoring levels as fellow forwards Ryan Walter, Dave Christian & Dennis Maruk (in Maruk's case outside of his outlying season with 136 points)

Why didn't Gartner have a season like Maruk had in 81–82? Or even a season relatively (or "relatively") close to Maruk's? (say 110–115 points) Or a playoff series with 13 points in 5 games? Because he didn't have it in him.

 

[c9777666]

I'm just speculating, but would it be fair to call him a Phil Kessel level player? Perhaps not an ideal franchise player throughout the 80s in his prime, or even a franchise player at all, but not too far from that level. Both are great goal scorers who gets it done with elite speed and a good shot. Kessel has better hands and skills, Gartner was less of a wallflower.

Kessel's career high was 37 goals. Forget 50 goals, Phil never even had a 40-goal season (Gartner in contrast had 9 seasons with at least 40 goals)

 

[c9777666]

Gaborik, without the peak sniping skills, is a good comp but there really isn't a great one out of todays group of players.

Maybe more Shane Doan (in terms of scoring only) but with more production but very consistent.

Gaborik was also very injury prone. Gartner if anything was not fragile- during all those 30 goal seasons, he missed only 39 games in his first 15 years.

Shane Doan? Only had 2 30-goal seasons. Gartner had only 2 seasons without 30 goals.

 

[c9777666]

One thing about Gartner I think should be noted was his durability.

When he had all those 30 goal seasons, he played all but 39 games for 15 years.

After the shortened 1995 season (played 38/48 games), he played back-to-back 82 game seasons in 1996-1997 in his late 30s. Only in his final year- 1998- did he really miss a chunk of games (played 60 games)

Missing only 71 games in 19 seasons given how hockey can be a rough and tough sport is very impressive.

 

[blogofmike]

You can't judge the defensive capabilities of the 1992–93 Montreal Canadiens only by listing or naming their defensemen, and you can't judge the offensive capabilities of the 1980s Washington Capitals only by listing or naming their forwards. Defensemen and forwards does not appear in separate vacuums in hockey games. The 80s Capitals had 6 straight seasons of both Scott Stevens and Larry Murphy. 80s Scott Stevens was not post 1994 Devils Stevens and had seasons with 72, 68, 65, 61 and 53 points when Gartner was on the same team. In 86–87 Larry Murphy outscored Gartner by 8 points in the same-ish amount of games played.

A speedster like Michael Gartner probably benefited a bit more from good puck delivering/puck moving Ds too, more than from some slow ass puck dishing playmaking center like say Adam Oates, much like 1997–98 speedster RW Peter Bondra scored 50+ goals on the Capitals without playing much at all 5 on 5 with said Oates (and outscored Oates, in the regular season that is, even by PPG).

But lets do this time consuming thing anyways

1980: Gartner outscores Ryan Walter by 2 points
1981: Gartner is outscored by Dennis Maruk by 3 points
1982: Gartner is outscored by Dennis Maruk again, this time by 56 points. But even if we remove that outlier he's still outscored by Ryan Walter by 7 points (in two games less played by Walter too)
1983: Gartner is outscored by Maruk for a third time, by 5 points. This time though in 7 less games, meaning Gartner had a slightly better PPG this season than a relatively steeply declining Dennis Maruk (after his monster season)
1984: Gartner outscores Dave Christian by 4 points and B-Å Gustafsson by 10 (in 11 more games played by Gartner relative to Gustafsson though, so worse PPG than B-Å Gustafsson)
1985: Gartner outscores Bobby Carpenter by 7 points
1986: Gartner is outscored by Christian by 8 points (though in 6 more games played by Christian, but the same type of PPG)
1987: Gartner is outscored by Larry Murphy by 8 points (see paragraph above)
1988: Gartner outscores Scott Stevens by 9 points
1989: Gartner is traded from the Capitals with 55 points in 56 games. On the same team Mike Ridley finished with 89 points in 80 games, and Geoff Courtnall also sported PPG+ with 42 goals and 80 points in 79 games.

Summary:

x) not a single instance where Gartner outscores the next best point producer on his own team by more than 9 points. Next biggest margin is 7 points. Next biggest margins are 4 points ("kinda") and 2 points. Reversely he's twice outscored by 8 (Murphy) and 7 (Walter) points (not counting the season where he's outscored by very many many points by Dennis Maruk)

x) consistently on the same type of scoring levels as fellow forwards Ryan Walter, Dave Christian & Dennis Maruk (in Maruk's case outside of his outlying season with 136 points)

Why didn't Gartner have a season like Maruk had in 81–82? Or even a season relatively (or "relatively") close to Maruk's? (say 110–115 points) Or a playoff series with 13 points in 5 games? Because he didn't have it in him.

5 of the top 8 even strength point totals posted by Capitals players in the 80s were posted by Mike Gartner.

Maruk has the most with 76. Gartner came a fairly close 2nd with 69.

PP opportunities often have a huge influence on individual point totals, as does PP usage. In 1982 there were 2 outlier teams with 400+ PPO.

In Pittsburgh Randy Carlyle pressed his advantage and stole the Norris Trophy, a feat no doubt aided by being out for 79 PPGF when the average team only had 73.

In Washington, Dennis Maruk scored 57 PP points, on 73 PPGF, which I believe tied the then-record for PP points with a 212 point Gretzky.

Gartner's PPGF totals suggest he was used less on the PP in Washington, and the Caps didn't see the same number of PPO until 88, by which time their offense dried up, Stevens and Murphy were 2nd and 3rd in team points, and Mike Ridley was the setup man for Gartner.

 

[bobbyking]

Kessel's career high was 37 goals. Forget 50 goals, Phil never even had a 40-goal season (Gartner in contrast had 9 seasons with at least 40 goals)

40 goals in his era is probably 30ish today

 

[sr edler]

5 of the top 8 even strength point totals posted by Capitals players in the 80s were posted by Mike Gartner.

Maruk has the most with 76. Gartner came a fairly close 2nd with 69.

PP opportunities often have a huge influence on individual point totals, as does PP usage. In 1982 there were 2 outlier teams with 400+ PPO.

In Pittsburgh Randy Carlyle pressed his advantage and stole the Norris Trophy, a feat no doubt aided by being out for 79 PPGF when the average team only had 73.

In Washington, Dennis Maruk scored 57 PP points, on 73 PPGF, which I believe tied the then-record for PP points with a 212 point Gretzky.

Gartner's PPGF totals suggest he was used less on the PP in Washington, and the Caps didn't see the same number of PPO until 88, by which time their offense dried up, Stevens and Murphy were 2nd and 3rd in team points, and Mike Ridley was the setup man for Gartner.

This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but anyways: not every player is equally good on the power play. Much like every player isn't equally good on the penalty kill, or equally good defensively, or equally strong at protecting the puck along the boards, or equally fast on their skates, or equally punishing hitters, or.... okay. To me it's seems really really super odd that Washington wouldn't use their best (or regularly most productive point producing) even strength forward that much on the PP. Like, what? Unless.... wait.

What about the thought that Dennis Maruk perhaps possessed skills that translated very well to the power play, and that's why he scored the most power play points since Gretzky (along with the opportunities obviously, because even I understand you can't score that much on the PP if you're not given that many PPs). There shouldn't have been much in the way of playing Gartner more on the power play, because it's not like all-situations players are unheard of.

Speedy wingers with a penchant for flying and shooting often doesn't translate magically to the power play, which to a large degree is about set-plays, slowing it down a little and clap-clap-clap. Grabner, Hagelin, Helm, Chimera. It's still possible though. Bure for instance often used to quarterback it from the point, which is still a skill. Because not everyone is equally good at quarterbacking it from the point either.

Gartner leading his team in even strength points 5 times out of 8 is good obviously, and I don't think anyone's in this thread really trying to say Gartner wasn't good, or even very good (at scoring goals), but if his forward teammates were so lousy as some posters here are trying to paint a picture of, shouldn't Gartner have done it 6 or 7 times instead?

Mike Ridley out-paced Gartner that year, so I don't buy the argument that Gartner made him, particularly not since he had a PPG season the next season without Gartner and another one two years down the road.

 

[The Panther]

I think we all understand that Gartner did not get into the Hall of Fame because of his peak. In his best couple of seasons, he was maybe the 4th-best right winger in hockey.

But as far as peak, prime, and career go (as three slightly different considerations), I personally am the least impressed by peak. This is because we have all seen (insert name)-type player have that one or two big seasons when everything fell into place, and then regress to the mean for his remaining 9 years or whatever. I'm also less impressed by players with big peaks separated by one or two disappointing seasons in between.

I am most impressed by a sustained, consistent prime of, say, at least 8 years (ideally more). That is the #1 thing to me in terms of evaluating individual players. In terms of that consideration, Gartner has to rank very high because he was consistently very good or elite at goal scoring for 17 straight seasons.

Then, in the career consideration, Gartner also does quite well since his 17 goal-scoring seasons are most of his career, and he played on two Canada Cup winners.

So, in sum, maybe Gartner's peak level is a bit below what we'd like for Hall of Fame standards. Okay, I can live with that, as long as his prime is really impressive and consistent (which it is) and his career record is strong, which it is.

 

[MXD]

Mike Gartner is a somewhat healthier Max Pacioretty with a full career.

 

[blogofmike]

This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but anyways: not every player is equally good on the power play. Much like every player isn't equally good on the penalty kill, or equally good defensively, or equally strong at protecting the puck along the boards, or equally fast on their skates, or equally punishing hitters, or.... okay. To me it's seems really really super odd that Washington wouldn't use their best (or regularly most productive point producing) even strength forward that much on the PP. Like, what? Unless.... wait.

What about the thought that Dennis Maruk perhaps possessed skills that translated very well to the power play, and that's why he scored the most power play points since Gretzky (along with the opportunities obviously, because even I understand you can't score that much on the PP if you're not given that many PPs). There shouldn't have been much in the way of playing Gartner more on the power play, because it's not like all-situations players are unheard of.

Speedy wingers with a penchant for flying and shooting often doesn't translate magically to the power play, which to a large degree is about set-plays, slowing it down a little and clap-clap-clap. Grabner, Hagelin, Helm, Chimera. It's still possible though. Bure for instance often used to quarterback it from the point, which is still a skill. Because not everyone is equally good at quarterbacking it from the point either.

Gartner leading his team in even strength points 5 times out of 8 is good obviously, and I don't think anyone's in this thread really trying to say Gartner wasn't good, or even very good (at scoring goals), but if his forward teammates were so lousy as some posters here are trying to paint a picture of, shouldn't Gartner have done it 6 or 7 times instead?

Mike Ridley out-paced Gartner that year, so I don't buy the argument that Gartner made him, particularly not since he had a PPG season the next season without Gartner and another one two years down the road.

Gartner was Cy Young goal scorer who wouldn't be well-suited to QB a PP, but it should be noted he was 3rd in PP goals his first year out of Washington, and 2nd the next year. Over the two years combined, his PP goal total was tied for 2nd with Cam Neely, and behind only Brett Hull. He was keeping better company than a Chimera or Helm in the PPG rankings. Gartner scored 15 PP goals 4 times in 90s and only twice in the 80s.

 

[DannyGallivan]

They guy was a consistent goal scorer no matter the era. That alone is fairly impressive.

He was...

...but not great.

 

[authentic]

Did he even peak as a top 20 player for more than 2 or 3 seasons? Not IMO.

He was a very good player for a long time but never really a top star and certainly never a superstar.

Gaborik, without the peak sniping skills, is a good comp but there really isn't a great one out of todays group of players.

Maybe more Shane Doan (in terms of scoring only) but with more production but very consistent.

Hardyvan123, do you still exist?

 

[scott clam]

Over the course of his playing career(1979-1998) only one player scored more goals than him. Some guy named Wayne Gretzky.