How inflated were Bobby Hull WHA stats?

[WingsFan95]

They were certainly inflated considering his 77 single season record in the league at age 36 but how does it correlate to reality?

I think it's a great topic considering his combined pro totals were freaking 913 goals. Doubtful he comes close to that in the NHL but it's certainly reasonable to consider him finishing ahead of Howe.

Straight up I don't think much can be made from his age 41 season scoring 6 goals in 27 games in his NHL return. Though one has to acknowledge after missing nearly the entire previous season for him to put up any goals at 41 in the NHL speaks volumes.

46 in 77 at age 39
21 in 34 at 38
53 in 80 at 37
77 in 78 at 36
53 in 75 at 35
51 in 63 at 34 (first WHA season)
50 in 78 at 33 (last NHL season)
44 in 78 at 32
38 in 61
58 in 74 at 30 and most in his NHL single season career which lead the league


I think considering his consistency from age 30 to his age 33 season and the level of scoring in the NHL increasing in that period I'm inclined to believe he'd have been putting up between 40-60 in the NHL for his first three WHA seasons. The most inflated is likely to be his age 39 season in the WHA putting up 46 in 77 games whereas in the NHL he probably is closer to 30 or lower.

Love to know opinions from those who saw him play those years.

But if we imagine him playing to his age 40 season in the NHL I think he finishes between 830-850 goals.

Click to read more...

 

[Michael Farkas]

What's the prompt though? Is there no WHA and the NHL is "whole"? Or is it just that Hull never leaves? Those are two different answers I think...

I'm quite certain that the WHA was a glorified minor league that had some good top end talent. And the more I watch mid-1970's NHL, the less I like it.

My short answer is: Hull still has "pull away from the pack" goal scoring and I think a fair bit of that would translate to the NHL. It would translate more if the WHA exists in this simulation. It's hard to reason what exactly happens to the world if the WHA never exists...or only exists for a couple years. That's complex.

But you go back and watch the games - the NHL games even...like, Gilbert Perreault is so much better than even Rick Martin and Rene Robert. Bobby Orr is so much better than Johnny Bucyk...ya know? The elite players are really elite, as we see throughout history...and they really feasted on most of the undercard of their respective leagues. And they really boosted linemates, statistically, as a result...and it sort of mucks it up for folks that don't go back and watch and evaluate...

So, I don't know...is Hull with Mikita still and the WHA exists still? If so, Hull is still scoring 50 in those seasons if he's healthy. That's probably my tl;dr on this...I'd say those first four WHA seasons are still 50 goal NHL seasons to whatever degree...and then you see where it slides from there...probably off of a cliff...but that's still at least 800 NHL goals...

 

[Professor What]

I'm not so sure it's reasonable to say he'd finish ahead of Howe. Howe was also racking up more goals in the WHA, and in another universe, where the NHL had different rules so that Mark and Marty could have played, he'd be doing it in the NHL. Howe had 174 WHA goals, and if we cut that in half (which is more than what we should do, in my opinion), he ends up with 888.

As for Hull, yeah, I think if he played in the NHL for those seasons instead of the WHA, he's an 800 goal scorer, but I'm not convinced that he scores 50 more than one more time, that being the year he put up 77. If we give the same treatment to everyone, I feel like he'd be sitting third or fourth on the all-time list right now, with Ovechkin having either recently passed him, or nipping at his heels, with Howe and Gretzky still to go.

 

[Midnight Judges]

It's hard to say IMO. Looking back there were some players who were wildly successful in the WHA and then went to the NHL only to be scrubs or 3rd liners. And there were other players whose stats were not all that different.

That said, within the context of all-time greats, it's hard to put much value lower league achievements as compared to playing against the best players in the world.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It's hard to say IMO. Looking back there were some players who were wildly successful in the WHA and then went to the NHL only to be scrubs or 3rd liners. And there were other players whose stats were not all that different.

That said, within the context of all-time greats, it's hard to put much value lower league achievements as compared to playing against the best players in the world.

And some, like Mike Rogers, were more productive in the NHL.

 

[The Panther]

I think he would have beat Howe. Just like Ovechkin now, he'd be reaching that point of being close to the record at an advanced age, and once he got very close he'd certainly hang around to beat it. And like the Caps the past couple years and (sort of) now, the Hawks in the mid-1970s really had nothing else to get excited about as the club was middling for the whole c.1974 to 1982 period.

My guess would be something like this:

-- 50 in 78 at 33 (last actual NHL season -- totals stands at 604)
Then, my guesses:
-- 46 at 34 (Hawks' actual goal total this year already went UP without Hull)
-- 42 at 35 (Hawks still a very strong club without Hull at this point)
-- 36 at 36 (Hawks fall off a cliff this season in reality, but still score okay, so... Hull getting older, but some very weak teams from this season to beat up on)
-- 32 at 37
-- 30 at 38
-- 27 at 39 (playing with Doug Wilson on the PP at this point...! Now 817 goals.)
-- 20 at 40 (now 837)

Maybe he retires here, in 1979.

 

[Gorskyontario]

The WHA had a winning record against the NHL. WHAhockey.com - WHA vs NHL

34-22-7.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Exhibition games aside. The WHA went 189-331-120 (.389 pts%) over the next two seasons (including games that had to produce two points for a WHA squad) and many of the top WHA players had their production levels significantly reduced or flaked out almost entirely...despite the NHL being at about its lowest point in terms of league quality since WWII...

 

[VMBM]

The WHA had a winning record against the NHL. WHAhockey.com - WHA vs NHL

34-22-7.

Because it was mostly the best WHA teams facing mostly mediocre/weak NHL teams.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Exhibition games aside. The WHA went 189-331-120 (.389 pts%) over the next two seasons (including games that had to produce two points for a WHA squad) and many of the top WHA players had their production levels significantly reduced or flaked out almost entirely...despite the NHL being at about its lowest point in terms of league quality since WWII...

4 of the top 10 scorers in the 1979-80 NHL season were from the WHA.

 

[Michael Farkas]

4 of the top 10 scorers in the 1979-80 NHL season were from the WHA.

Sorry for the c&p that is slight askew, but it applies so readily...

Nah. It was a somewhat top heavy minor league. Sure, 6 of the top 11. One of which was Gretzky, one was a Gretzky linemate.

When you expand the sample...only 33 of the top 100 scorers in 1980 had any WHA experience. Which isn't really fair unto itself either...because that includes:
- Rookie Michel Goulet who played one year there because he couldn't play in the NHL.
- Bengt-Ake Gustafsson who played two WHA playoff games in '79 and nothing else.
- Guys like Robert MacMillan who had been playing in the NHL since 74-75, but took a few extra bucks early on while the gettin' was good...

I won't even go into the staying power of these top scorers as the league improved after absorbing part of a minor league...while "6 of 11" may be true, but misleading as an indication of league quality...

 

[Gorskyontario]

Because it was mostly the best WHA teams facing mostly mediocre/weak NHL teams.

Well looking at the list, there is no habs, the bruins only played once (1-0), flyers once(1-0), islanders once (0-1).

So your claim probably does have some validity to it. However the mid-late 70s nhl consisted of 16-18-17 teams. So unless someone is willing to see the record of each team playing each exhibition I don't see how this could be taken in full context.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Sorry for the c&p that is slight askew, but it applies so readily...

So the nhl had 17 teams, absorbed 4 teams(2 wha teams turned into minor league teams and folded). Yet the wha represented 40% of top 10 scorers in the NHL.

Sounds like a pretty good league to me.


How WHA teams did in the NHL in 79-80 is completely irrelevant considering WHA teams could only protect 2(or 3?) players.

For example;

Kent Nilsson (b.1956) Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Statistics of Kent Nilsson, a hockey player from Nynashamn, Sweden born Aug 31 1956 who was active from 1974 to 1997.

www.hockeydb.com

Terry Ruskowski Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Statistics and Records of Terry Ruskowski, a hockey player and coach from Prince Albert, SASK born Dec 31 1954 who was active from 1971 to 1989.

www.hockeydb.com

Rich Preston Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Statistics and Records of Rich Preston, a hockey player and coach from Regina, SASK born May 22 1952 who was active from 1969 to 1987.

www.hockeydb.com

The Jets lost several good offensive players, who scored 93,70,61 points in the NHL the year after.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Bobby would be in the 800+ goal club.

 

[Michael Farkas]

That's an evaluation that would barely tip the scales of "superficial".

I understand how many they could protect. But look at how many top 10 scorers on the Jets in 1980 played on the team the year before. The WHA having to shed a ton of minor league talents isn't something I'm prepared to shed any tears for...

 

[Gorskyontario]

That's an evaluation that would barely tip the scales of "superficial".

I understand how many they could protect. But look at how many top 10 scorers on the Jets in 1980 played on the team the year before. The WHA having to shed a ton of minor league talents isn't something I'm prepared to shed any tears for...

So you're saying Kent Nilsson is a minor league talent? Not exactly a great judge of talent then. I can only assume to presume some inherent bias here.

 

[Grant D Pennell]

What's the prompt though? Is there no WHA and the NHL is "whole"? Or is it just that Hull never leaves? Those are two different answers I think...

I'm quite certain that the WHA was a glorified minor league that had some good top end talent. And the more I watch mid-1970's NHL, the less I like it.

My short answer is: Hull still has "pull away from the pack" goal scoring and I think a fair bit of that would translate to the NHL. It would translate more if the WHA exists in this simulation. It's hard to reason what exactly happens to the world if the WHA never exists...or only exists for a couple years. That's complex.

But you go back and watch the games - the NHL games even...like, Gilbert Perreault is so much better than even Rick Martin and Rene Robert. Bobby Orr is so much better than Johnny Bucyk...ya know? The elite players are really elite, as we see throughout history...and they really feasted on most of the undercard of their respective leagues. And they really boosted linemates, statistically, as a result...and it sort of mucks it up for folks that don't go back and watch and evaluate...

So, I don't know...is Hull with Mikita still and the WHA exists still? If so, Hull is still scoring 50 in those seasons if he's healthy. That's probably my tl;dr on this...I'd say those first four WHA seasons are still 50 goal NHL seasons to whatever degree...and then you see where it slides from there...probably off of a cliff...but that's still at least 800 NHL goals...

Hull didn’t play with Mikita. Hull showed in the 76 Canada cup he was still an elite player . I think he averages 40 from 72-77 and then drops as age and injuries and personal issues caught up with him. His WHA numbers are probably .70 or so as are others compared to NHL . His are inflated by being on a very good jets team and being with Hedberg and Nilsson.

 

[Gorskyontario]

It's also important to remember Bobby Hull of the Jets challenged the Habs to a best of 7 series for the cup. The habs declined, which is an odd way for a 'superior' league to react.

 

[Michael Farkas]

So you're saying Kent Nilsson is a minor league talent? Not exactly a great judge of talent then. I can only assume to presume some inherent bias here.

How could you have possibly come up with that conclusion? Either one of them.

 

[MadLuke]

It's also important to remember Bobby Hull of the Jets challenged the Habs to a best of 7 series for the cup. The habs declined, which is an odd way for a 'superior' league to react.

Not necessarily at all, owning the Stanley Cups is a very precious asset for the NHL.

Imagine a beer league challenging Vegas for the cup last summer (I am sure many would have loved it), would it be odd for the NHL and the Golden Knights to refuse ?

The reverse would be more odd, the inferior league dream to play the big one trophy, as nothing to lose, is a superior use of their time than their average use of their time, etc....

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's also important to remember Bobby Hull of the Jets challenged the Habs to a best of 7 series for the cup. The habs declined, which is an odd way for a 'superior' league to react.

Uh huh. If Farjestad calls up the Vancouver Canucks tomorrow and says, "Play us for Thor's Crown" or some nonsense, you think anyone is gonna take that up? Of course not.

Hell, Bobby Hull himself said that it was second-rate league during the 1976-77 season.

Almost every team that comes in here is getting worse. There just hasn't been the improvement we expected. We're not getting the top young kids. They don't want to play in a second-rate league.

If there was a challenge of any magnitude, it was probably just a money grab...which was the entire concept of the league in the first place. It was total amateur hour.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Uh huh. If Farjestad calls up the Vancouver Canucks tomorrow and says, "Play us for Thor's Crown" or some nonsense, you think anyone is gonna take that up? Of course not.

Hell, Bobby Hull himself said that it was second-rate league during the 1976-77 season.



If there was a challenge of any magnitude, it was probably just a money grab...which was the entire concept of the league in the first place. It was total amateur hour.

At one time the Stanley cup was a challenge cup.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Not necessarily at all, owning the Stanley Cups is a very precious asset for the NHL.

Imagine a beer league challenging Vegas for the cup last summer (I am sure many would have loved it), would it be odd for the NHL and the Golden Knights to refuse ?

The reverse would be more odd, the inferior league dream to play the big one trophy, as nothing to lose, is a superior use of their time than their average use of their time, etc....

The wha wasn't a beer league, even if the top teams weren't on par with the habs. Secondly their primary motivation should have been to make money. As Larry Holmes said 'we do it for the money'.

Hell, Bobby Hull himself said that it was second-rate league during the 1976-77 season.

I don't think anyone would contest that the NHL was superior to the WHA. However you call it a glorified minor league, when it was clearly far superior to the AHL/CHL/IHL at the time. I also don't believe the WHA ever had teams as garbage as the mid 70's capitals, or kansas city scouts.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't think anyone would contest that the NHL was superior to the WHA. However you call it a glorified minor league, when it was clearly far superior to the AHL/CHL/IHL at the time. I also don't believe the WHA ever had teams as garbage as the mid 70's capitals, or kansas city scouts.

At the time? Of course. That's the "glorified" part. I don't know if we'll ever be able to figure it out because I'm not aware of much film...but if you're speaking from seeing these leagues back then, are you actually convinced that the WHA in, say, 1976, was better than the AHL or WHL in, say, 1966?

I have my doubts.

And that's not to say that the WHA didn't have top level talent. They did. But underneath that level, it falls off a cliff for me. The NHL continued to deteriorate as they got farther away from the sponsorship era, added more teams, and had less proper development paths...so as the 70's wore on, the NHL product got worse too.

There's this weird ribbon that a couple of folks are wearing by the fact that Gretzky and a linemate also were productive in the NHL as if it justifies the WHA's quality. But that's already been dispelled easily when you expand it to, roughly, the top-six forwards across the league.

But what about the reverse...?

Top 20 WHA scorers in 1979:
Real Cloutier - nearly a goal per game, almost 2 points per game. Settles into being just over a point per game player in the NHL in his prime years. Never finished top 10 in goals/assists/points in the NHL after being a fixture of such in the WHA, starting as a teenager.

Robbie Ftorek - Goes from WHA assist leader and regular 100 point producer, ends up being a sub-point per game player in an NHL where everyone and their mother was a point per game. It took him two years at a whack to match his WHA totals.

Wayne Gretzky - He had, what, 100 something points as a 17 year old? I mean, he's otherworldly no matter what.

Mark Howe - Also a real legit player, more complete than the fly-by-night guys that populated this league. He transitioned into having an amazing NHL career...even after 1985, when you basically everyone hit a wall as the NHL recovered and the losers were tossed aside.

Kent Nilsson - Another star level talent. He could have continued in the NHL past 1987 if he chose to. Though, he certainly benefited from the overall soft defensive play of the WHA...his talent is clear.

Morris Lukowich - 60+ goals in the WHA, then it took two NHL seasons to stick that kind of year together again. Flaked out of the league by 30, like many other prolific players...hit that mid 80's NHL recovery and couldn't hang.

Marc Tardif - Production halved by the jump to a deeper league.

Andre Lacroix - Got a chance with the expansion Flyers and then started to work his way out of the league. Became an all time WHA player. Couldn't hack it (at a fairly advanced age, to be fair) in the NHL on the other side.

Terry Ruskowski - Was a really good player on the best teams in the WHA, then hung on as a setup man on the worst teams in the NHL. I'll give him credit for keeping it going in the NHL though, he deserves that.

Peter Sullivan - Point per game WHAer...wasn't good enough for the NHL.

Serge Bernier - See Andre Lacroix.

Rich LeDuc - Not good enough to play in the NHL regularly on either side of the coin.

Mike Rogers - Oddly productive in the early 80's NHL. Out of the league at age 30, that dreaded mid 80's wall that incomplete, poorly developed players generally couldn't hop.

Blair McDonald - Friend of Wayne-o, see: Mike Rogers.

Reg Thomas - Another top 20 WHA scorer that absolutely could not play in the NHL.

Brett Calligan - See: Blair McDonald

Jamie Hislop - Another guy that was a prominent WHAer, couldn't survive the mid 80's NHL recovery.

Ron Chipperfield - Another top 20 WHA scorer that couldn't play in the NHL in his prime. A bad NHL, still couldn't do it.

Peter Marsh - Yet another guy that couldn't survive the mid 80's talent recovery despite being 27.

Dave Keon - 40 year old guy just keeping it going. Showing the adaptability to extend his career way longer than most could because the conditions were such that he could continue do his thing despite being an O6 star. He finally got free to play offensive hockey after playing for the defensive Leafs...good for him. Must have been a breath of fresh air to have all that open ice...

That's not impressive. And again, it's not like early 80's NHL is anything. It stinks. But even these top end, star WHAers - generally speaking, couldn't hack it. That tells me you had a bunch of minor league talent and a handful of stars taking advantage of them. Dave Dryden, Jim Corsi, and these other prominent WHA goalies - couldn't hack it in the NHL either.

I think the mid 60's AHL/WHL has the potential to be better than this mess. Hell, when the KHL was plucking off NHL players and was flush with money and wasn't unbalanced like it is now, that peak KHL is probably better than this league at its best too if I had to speculate...which is indeed what I'm doing...

 

[Golden_Jet]

.but if you're speaking from seeing these leagues back then, are you actually convinced that the WHA in, say, 1976, was better than the AHL or WHL in, say, 1966?

Yes, easy answer for AHL
and lol @ WHL