blogofmike
Registered User
- Dec 16, 2010
- 2,185
- 933
(Mods may feel free to merge with Ziggy's if content doesn't merit its own thread.)
In some thread some time ago I responded to QPQ and noted that the Canadiens as a team weren't impacted in terms of GF and GA when Doug Harbey was gone, or the Devils when Brodeur was gone. So on the (belated) anniversary of the Gretzky trade, I went to hockeyreference to see what happened to the Oilers and Kings when Gretzky left/arrived:
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
Or if you prefer adjusted:
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
Obviously there's lots of noise and Gretzky's teams aren't playing in a vacuum. Edmonton down by 51 adjusted and LA up by 51 adjusted is as much a coincidence as anything else. But I think he can take a fair bit of credit for impacting ES goal scoring.
Edmonton was #1 each year except 1988, when Calgary beat them by 10 ESGF (Gretzky missed 16 games). After the trade, Edmonton was 5th in 1989 and 11th in 1990. They were a good ES offense, but definitely part of the peloton, if you will. Jimmy Carson had a better ES year in Edmonton than LA (up to 65 from 59) tying for 8th in ES points in 1989 (he was 9th in 88.)
LA was 8th in ESGF in 1988, then spent 3 years at #1. Not to spoil anything, but when Gretzky goes from doubling Jeremy Roenick's ES point totals in 1991, to his post-Suter level of only beating JR by 5 ES points (instead of 52) the Kings fall from consistent leaders to average (9th) in 1992.
While every good player contributes something, and every player benefits from good teammates, it does seem that Wayne Gretzky was more of a point maker (creating more goals than others would have in a similar spot), than a point taker (getting points others could have gotten in a similarly plum role).
In some thread some time ago I responded to QPQ and noted that the Canadiens as a team weren't impacted in terms of GF and GA when Doug Harbey was gone, or the Devils when Brodeur was gone. So on the (belated) anniversary of the Gretzky trade, I went to hockeyreference to see what happened to the Oilers and Kings when Gretzky left/arrived:
Year | OilersTmESGF | OilersTmESGA | NHL Avg | KingsESGF | KingsESGA |
1986 | 321 | 218 | 224 | 206 | 270 |
1987 | 274 | 202 | 212 | 212 | 233 |
1988 | 252 | 191 | 195 | 204 | 249 |
1989 | 215 | 211 | 202 | 272 | 242 |
1990 | 209 | 195 | 208 | 251 | 235 |
1991 | 196 | 188 | 194 | 252 | 173 |
87-88 (2yrs) | 526 | 393 | 407 | 416 | 482 |
89-90 (2yrs) | 424 | 406 | 410 | 523 | 477 |
Or if you prefer adjusted:
Year | OilersTmESGF | OilersTmESGA | NHL Avg | KingsESGF | KingsESGA |
1986 | 287 | 195 | 200 | 184 | 241 |
1987 | 258 | 191 | 200 | 200 | 220 |
1988 | 258 | 196 | 200 | 209 | 255 |
1989 | 213 | 209 | 200 | 269 | 240 |
1990 | 201 | 188 | 200 | 241 | 226 |
1991 | 202 | 194 | 200 | 260 | 178 |
87-88 (2yrs) | 258 | 193 | 200 | 204 | 237 |
89-90 (2yrs) | 207 | 198 | 200 | 255 | 233 |
Obviously there's lots of noise and Gretzky's teams aren't playing in a vacuum. Edmonton down by 51 adjusted and LA up by 51 adjusted is as much a coincidence as anything else. But I think he can take a fair bit of credit for impacting ES goal scoring.
Edmonton was #1 each year except 1988, when Calgary beat them by 10 ESGF (Gretzky missed 16 games). After the trade, Edmonton was 5th in 1989 and 11th in 1990. They were a good ES offense, but definitely part of the peloton, if you will. Jimmy Carson had a better ES year in Edmonton than LA (up to 65 from 59) tying for 8th in ES points in 1989 (he was 9th in 88.)
LA was 8th in ESGF in 1988, then spent 3 years at #1. Not to spoil anything, but when Gretzky goes from doubling Jeremy Roenick's ES point totals in 1991, to his post-Suter level of only beating JR by 5 ES points (instead of 52) the Kings fall from consistent leaders to average (9th) in 1992.
While every good player contributes something, and every player benefits from good teammates, it does seem that Wayne Gretzky was more of a point maker (creating more goals than others would have in a similar spot), than a point taker (getting points others could have gotten in a similarly plum role).