If Kuch and McD both get 100 assists

[Regal]

I wouldn’t say it devalues it. Obviously context is needed and getting 100 today isn’t the same as it would have been 10 years ago. But we had plenty of high scoring years where others weren’t able to do it. It just so happens that we have three players having unreal seasons this year. And as others mentioned, there’s a big drop after these 3. Similar to say 88-89 where there were 4 guys to hit 150 points. I don’t think that alone devalues Yzerman having 155, when the drop to 5th was huge.

 

[Connor McConnor]

Agreed. The idea that scoring is higher because there's so much more talent in the league is plainly false.

First, if talent is so much better today, we'd see a slow and gradual increase in the number of goals per game. (That's because it would take time for the "next generation" of players to enter the league, and displace the previous generation). Instead, we saw a full decade with a very steady level of offense (from 2008 to 2017, eight of ten seasons featured between 2.70 and 2.79 goals per game). Then, once goalie equipment shrunk, scoring immediately soared. I think someone would have to be willfully blind to ignore this explanation.

Second, if talent is so much better today, then players from 10-15 years ago shouldn't be having such great results, this late into their career. Crosby is 36 (a full decade past a player's typical goal-scoring peak) and he already has the 3rd highest goals total of his entire career. Joe Pavelski just had his 1st and 4th highest scoring seasons, at ages 37 and 38. Ovechkin reached 90 points for the first time in 12(!) years, at age 36, while Backstrom missed half the season. Stamkos set a career high in points at age 31 (granted he's a on a stronger, deeper team now - but just from watching him, it's immediately obviously he lacks the acceleration that he had a decade ago). I can keep going with examples. But the point is - if the new generation is clearly better than the last one, it wouldn't be possible for so many star players to have huge seasons since late into their careers.

(Just so nobody misconstrues my point - I'm not saying that the previous generation was better. But I think the higher totals from today's top stars are at least partly due to the fact that they're playing in a higher scoring league, thanks in part to smaller goalie equipment).

What was goalie equipment like when Gretz and Co. were playing? Do we discredit them when looking back?

 

[Cup or Bust]

It could be just this season. If it keeps happening season after season of course it will be less exciting or amazing. Kind of like how 60 goals has kind of become less monumental now that is has been done multiple times in the last few seasons.

 

[Regal]

Agreed. The idea that scoring is higher because there's so much more talent in the league is plainly false.

First, if talent is so much better today, we'd see a slow and gradual increase in the number of goals per game. (That's because it would time for the "next generation" of players to enter the league, and displace the previous generation). Instead, we saw a full decade with a very steady level of offense (from 2008 to 2017, eight of ten seasons featured between 2.70 and 2.79 goals per game). Then, once goalie equipment shrunk, scoring immediately soared. I think someone would have to be willfully blind to ignore this explanation.

Second, if talent is so much better today, then players from 10-15 years ago shouldn't be having such great results, this late into their career. Crosby is 36 (a full decade past a player's typical goal-scoring peak) and he already has the 3rd highest goals total of his entire career. Joe Pavelski just had his 1st and 4th highest scoring seasons, at ages 37 and 38. Ovechkin reached 90 points for the first time in 12(!) years, at age 36, while Backstrom missed half the season. Stamkos set a career high in points at age 31 (granted he's a on a stronger, deeper team now - but just from watching him, it's immediately obviously he lacks the acceleration that he had a decade ago). I can keep going with examples. But the point is - if the new generation is clearly better than the last one, it wouldn't be possible for so many star players to have huge seasons since late into their careers.

(Just so nobody misconstrues my point - I'm not saying that the previous generation was better. But I think the higher totals from today's top stars are at least partly due to the fact that they're playing in a higher scoring league, thanks in part to smaller goalie equipment).

I do think to some degree the league is more offensively talented today than 10ish years ago, in particular the emphasis on puck moving defensemen, but I think some people fail to take into account that an increase of talent would make production higher for everyone. If your defensemen are better in transition that’s going to create more opportunities for your forwards. If more players are shooting better (which I think is another factor along with goalie pads), and thus scoring more goals, others are going to get assists on those goals. If teams have to defend those shots different that opens up more space for other players. So even if the scoring increase was entirely from an increase in talent, it doesn’t mean that those individual players would be scoring the same in a lower scoring environment

 

[bleedgreen]

and they were young!

I wish we could have seen those up and coming 90s stars get to play long, healthy careers in a similar scoring environment to the guys who came before them.

Ditto for the Crosby generation compared to the kids, now.

The odds that Crosby was at his best when he got 120 are about the same as Selanne being at his best in his rookie year. Not likely.

Well Mogilny was part of maybe the most explosive duo with Lafontaine in terms of one season. Mogilny broke his leg in the playoffs while Lafontaine also had a significant injury. They didn’t play together healthy and get on a run again. Selanne I believe had an horrible Achilles injury the next season and was also never quite the same despite being amazing still.

You can’t blame the era on why they didn’t achieve it again. It’s the same with Yzerman, he had the best non Lemieux/Gretzky season ever but never hit the same heights because of a knee injury….not the era.

The biggest era issue is likely technology. Mcdavid could’ve gone the way of Yzerman without technology with his knee.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

What was goalie equipment like when Gretz and Co. were playing? Do we discredit them when looking back?

I mean, most fans on HF DO discredit their totals quite often? No one thinks Gretzky's scoring 200+ points if he played in 2010. So yes, the players from the 80's do constantly have their totals questioned due to the era they played in.

 

[DFC]

It could be just this season. If it keeps happening season after season of course it will be less exciting or amazing. Kind of like how 60 goals has kind of become less monumental now that is has been done multiple times in the last few seasons.

100 assists, weirdly, might be even bigger, if only because it's more exclusive.

There is some validity to the idea that McDavid BELONGS in the group of players that have done it (literally the best three ever), while Kucherov getting in makes you question the accomplishment.

To me it's sort of like, Ovechkin is quite likely the best goal-scorer of all time, and might break that record. Doesn't make him the best player. I think there's a very good argument that Kucherov is the best playmaking winger of all-time, but that doesn't mean he belongs on the top tier of over-all players. It does mean he might crack 100 assists and have his name on a list with Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, and McDavid.

I think what we are seeing is a bit of a perfect storm. Both things are true at the same time: We have a handful of extraordinary players in their prime as the league has succeeded in raising scoring. There is still a huge gap between what the top 3 are doing and the rest of the league.

I think Kucherov will go down as a Jagr-tier player. Just that next level down from the tippy top tier, but, IMO, he's above guys like Sakic and Yzerman. I say that as a guy who has lived his entire life with Steve Yzerman as his hero.

Well Mogilny was part of maybe the most explosive duo with Lafontaine in terms of one season. Mogilny broke his leg in the playoffs while Lafontaine also had a significant injury. They didn’t play together healthy and get on a run again. Selanne I believe had an horrible Achilles injury the next season and was also never quite the same despite being amazing still.

You can’t blame the era on why they didn’t achieve it again. It’s the same with Yzerman, he had the best non Lemieux/Gretzky season ever but never hit the same heights because of a knee injury….not the era.

The biggest era issue is likely technology. Mcdavid could’ve gone the way of Yzerman without technology with his knee.

If I'm not mistaken, the knee injury actually came before Yzerman's 155 point season, but stuck with him his entire career.

He put up 137 in 92-93. I think the 155 season was, in a lot of ways, similar to what Kucherov is doing -- sometimes when a team REALLY relies on one guy for all its scoring, it drives that guy's scoring up. If I'm not mistaken, Yzerman more less was the Red Wings' offense in 88/89, which is pretty similar to Kucherov's situation in TB this year, despite being surrounded by better players.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I do think to some degree the league is more talented today, in particular the the increased emphasis on puck moving defensemen, but I think some people fail to take into account that an increase of talent would make production higher for everyone. If your defensemen are better in transition that’s going to create more opportunities for your forwards. If more players are shooting better (which I think is another factor along with goalie pads), and thus scoring more goals, others are going to get assists on those goals. If teams have to defend those shots different that opens up more space for other players. So even if the scoring increase is in part from talent, it doesn’t mean that those players would be scoring the same in a lower scoring environment

Agreed. I think it's fair to say that there are more/better puck-moving defenseman today, and that helps translate into more offense. But that's also a product of the times. If you teleported someone back 15 years ago, they wouldn't have access to that. I'd describe that as a change in coaching/strategy, rather than a change in the inherent level of talent that's in the league.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

What was goalie equipment like when Gretz and Mario were putting up 200 pt seasons? Do we discredit them when looking back?

It's not about discrediting, it's about considering the context. Someone would need to be willfully blind to not take into account the reality that Gretzky and Lemieux were playing against goalies that had smaller equipment, and less advanced techniques. This should not be a controversial point.

(To be clear, Gretzky was so dominant that even one you account for his inflated scoring environment, he's still the greatest player in NHL history. And Lemieux is probably 4th, maybe even higher. But I don't think it's sacrilegious to say that both of these players, in terms of raw numbers, benefitted from spending most of their careers in a very high-scoring era).

 

[DFC]

It's not about discrediting, it's about considering the context. Someone would need to be willfully blind to not take into account the reality that Gretzky and Lemieux were playing against goalies that had smaller equipment, and less advanced techniques. This should not be a controversial point.

(To be clear, Gretzky was so dominant that even one you account for his inflated scoring environment, he's still the greatest player in NHL history. And Lemieux is probably 4th, maybe even higher. But I don't think it's sacrilegious to say that both of these players, in terms of raw numbers, benefitted from spending most of their careers in a very high-scoring era).

One of the main arguments for guys in that golden tier being sort of from another planet was Lemieux's comeback. Because even after all that time, and even at that advanced age, there was still quite clear separation between himself and the #2 player. After that, it becomes hard to argue that Lemieux wouldn't dominate any era, and the only way he wouldn't be the best player in the league is if another "special" player is around at the time (Gretzky, for instance).

I think we have a pretty fair assessment of the best guys. If not their ranking, their tier. For my money, McDavid belongs in that golden tier because he's just so clearly better than his peers, and it's hard to argue that this isn't one of the most talent-rich eras in history. Sometimes you have a guy who's just built different.

 

[The Macho King]

I mean, most fans on HF DO discredit their totals quite often? No one thinks Gretzky's scoring 200+ points if he played in 2010. So yes, the players from the 80's do constantly have their totals questioned due to the era they played in.

I don't think discredit is the right word, but those totals are obviously inflated. Doesn't diminish them as players, but scoring environments are just wildly different across NHL eras.

 

[Bob and 200 others]

Best I could do fellas.

 

[ijuka]

If 100 assists was so easy, why weren’t tons of players in the 80’s getting it.

It’s impressive whether or not much gets it

Gretzky got it 11 times in a row. Other than him, in the 80s only Lemieux hit it, once.

100+ assists 11 seasons in a row might be a pretty tough record to break, by the way.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

I think it's rude of Kucherov to encroach on McDavid's accomplishments

McDavid is too big of a legend to share a record with a 2nd tier hall of famer like Kucherov. Lightning should bench him at 98 assists for the good of the league.

 

[Mulletman]

Kucherov getting 100 assists would be like this all over again:

 

[nowhereman]

Maybe. Or the NHL just has better players now than when they were in their prime. Guys like MacK, Drai, Kucherov, AM, and McDavid are lining up to be better than a lot of the guys Malkin, Sid and Ovi went against

Scoring is absolutely through the roof and it's getting pretty difficult to ignore the impact it is having on individual stats. Crosby just scored 40+ goals at 36, OV had 50+ goals at the same age and Karlsson scored 100 points last season. Even guys like Pavelski and Mats Zuccarello are putting together career seasons in their late 30s. On the other hand, you've got the likes of Huberdeau notching 115 points, RNH putting up 104 points and JT Miller looking at two 99+ point seasons in three years. The entire top 10 will have 100+ points for the 2nd year in a row.

We haven't seen an era of scoring like this since the 80s and it's skewing perceptions (i.e. see the "Crosby vs. MacKinnon" thread from a couple weeks back).

 

[snag]

Kucherov getting 100 assists would be like this all over again: View attachment 847757

Four goats and a pack mule?

 

[Sky04]

If Joe Thornton was in his prime now he pretty easily is a 100 assist guy I'd think. He had 92 and 96 assist seasons in dead puck eras. His 96 assist season he beat the 2nd guy in assists by 25. Mcdavid is beating kuch by just 6 and McKinnon by just 16.

I think it kinda devalues it.

This guy really just said 06 and 07 was the dead puck era. Brush up on your history kid, teams were coming off 1 season lockout with new rules and salary cap, scoring was exploited back then cause most teams were carrying old and slow defenseman, it was nowhere near as competitive as it is now.

 

[The Shadow]

compared to..?

I think its still pretty bonkers, Mogilny and Selanne both recorded 76 goals in the same season. Neither came anywhere close again.

1993 may be the best season in NHL history for various reasons

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I don't think discredit is the right word, but those totals are obviously inflated. Doesn't diminish them as players, but scoring environments are just wildly different across NHL eras.

And I don't think anyone is "discrediting" what McDavid/Kucherov are on the brink of achieving. It's no different than the 1980's stats that people are just pointing out that you need to also factor in the scoring environment before making proclamations about today's players versus 10 ago, just like you'd need to put into context how easy it was to score in the 80's before comparing a guy who scored 100 back then compares to a guy who scored 90 in the Dead Puck Era.

 

[DearDiary]

Maybe. Or the NHL just has better players now than when they were in their prime. Guys like MacK, Drai, Kucherov, AM, and McDavid are lining up to be better than a lot of the guys Malkin, Sid and Ovi went against

Players didn't significantly change and refs didn't make drastic changes in how they ref games over the past 10 or so years. The clear outlier is the significant decreases in goalie equipment. Each pad's width being reduced by 1" and goalies having to have chest/stomach padding conform to their body has been the biggest difference. Goalies can no longer cheat with their glove, they have to keep it closer to their body because equipment jutting out from their body can't save a puck anymore.

 

[WalterLundy]

And I don't think anyone is "discrediting" what McDavid/Kucherov are on the brink of achieving. It's no different than the 1980's stats that people are just pointing out that you need to also factor in the scoring environment before making proclamations about today's players versus 10 ago, just like you'd need to put into context how easy it was to score in the 80's before comparing a guy who scored 100 back then compares to a guy who scored 90 in the Dead Puck Era.

‘24 Crosby in ‘16:
77 GP: 34 G, 39 A, 73 P (0.95)

Actual 2016 Crosby:
80 GP: 36 G, 49 A, 85 P (1.06)

‘16 Crosby in ‘24:
80 GP: 42 G, 56 A, 98 P (1.23)

Actual 24 Crosby:
77 GP: 40 G, 45 A, 85 P (1.10)

Crosby as a 36 year old being 90% as good as his 28 year old prime version on a Stanley Cup winning team is a combination of some things. 2015-16 Crosby was really bad statistically by generational standards. 2023-24 Crosby has been incredible as a 36 year old. 36 year old 2024 Crosby would be 10th in ppg in 2016 while 2016 Crosby this season would he 12th in ppg. The league is higher scoring now but the performances of the best players in the 2012-2017 range just flat out don’t match up with the best guys now in a relative sense. I think both are true.

2015-16: EVG: 2.01, PPG: 0.58, SHG: 0.08
2023-24: EVG: 2.36, PPG: 0.64, SHG: 0.09

 

[authentic]

If Joe Thornton was in his prime now he pretty easily is a 100 assist guy I'd think. He had 92 and 96 assist seasons in dead puck eras. His 96 assist season he beat the 2nd guy in assists by 25. Mcdavid is beating kuch by just 6 and McKinnon by just 16.

I think it kinda devalues it.

2005-07 was not the dead puck era though, closer in scoring to the past few seasons than the actual dead puck era or 2012-17.

All three are having outlier seasons and playing on a level above everyone else. MacKinnon has 83 and the fourth most assists is 70. In points the gap right now between 3rd and 4th is 19 points which is super rare. Assists haven't gone up all that much outside the top two

I think this is the answer here. Scoring has risen but the top 3 in points and Matthews for goals are clearly on another level than the rest of the league in offensive skill in an all-time great way.

 

[authentic]

‘24 Crosby in ‘16:
77 GP: 34 G, 39 A, 73 P (0.95)

Actual 2016 Crosby:
80 GP: 36 G, 49 A, 85 P (1.06)

‘16 Crosby in ‘24:
80 GP: 42 G, 56 A, 98 P (1.23)

Actual 24 Crosby:
77 GP: 40 G, 45 A, 85 P (1.10)

Crosby as a 36 year old being 90% as good as his 28 year old prime version on a Stanley Cup winning team is a combination of some things. 2015-16 Crosby was really bad statistically by generational standards. 2023-24 Crosby has been incredible as a 36 year old. 36 year old 2024 Crosby would be 10th in ppg in 2016 while 2016 Crosby this season would he 12th in ppg. The league is higher scoring now but the performances of the best players in the 2012-2017 range just flat out don’t match up with the best guys now in a relative sense. I think both are true.

2015-16: EVG: 2.01, PPG: 0.58, SHG: 0.08
2023-24: EVG: 2.36, PPG: 0.64, SHG: 0.09

Really too bad Crosby had the injuries he did as I think he would've extended his short term dominance a while longer. After 2014 you can just see that wrist injury had an effect on him as he never handled the puck the same way really on a consistent basis, and obviously the concussions caused him to tone down the intensity in his game a lot.

 

[Dirty Dan]

If there is talk of assists being devalued this means Matthew's is a favorite for the Hart