Lemieux's 92-93 season - GOAT season by any player

[Samsquanch]

Apologies if this has been done before guys. Lemieux was my childhood idol, and I've argued in favor of him as the greatest until I was blue and black in the face before.

But as I matured, and as I became less biased, I slowly acknowledged that you can't argue against Gretzky being the GOAT, its cut and dry if you consider his entire career.

But having said that, I still think that peak Lemieux was the greatest player that we've ever seen. I see his 88-89 performance get mentioned quite often, but it wasn't his most spectacular.

What he did in the 92-93 season, while battling hodgkins lymphoma and undergoing radiation therapy, all the while still destroying the league, easily must be the most impressive feat ever done in the history of the NHL by any player. The great one included.

I hate to quote Wikipedia, but here is the season run down;

The Penguins started the 1992–93 season well, and Lemieux set a franchise record with at least one goal in twelve consecutive games, from October 6 to November 1. He was on pace to challenge Gretzky's records of 92 goals in one season (1981–82) and 215 points in one season (1985–86), until January 12, 1993, when he made the shocking announcement that he had been diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma.

He was forced to undergo energy-draining aggressive radiation treatments, leaving his career and possibly his survival in doubt. He missed two months of play, and without him, the Penguins struggled. When he returned, he was 12 points behind Buffalo's Pat LaFontaine in the scoring race.
On the day of his last radiation treatment, Lemieux flew to Philadelphia to play against the Flyers, where he scored a goal and an assist in a 5-4 loss.

With Lemieux back, Pittsburgh won an NHL record 17 consecutive games to finish first overall for the first time in franchise history;their 119 points are still a franchise record. Lemieux scored at an incredible pace, notching an average 2.67 points per game—the third highest points-per-game for a season, behind only Wayne Gretzky's 1983–84 and 1985–86 averages of 2.77 and 2.69, respectively.

Lemieux won his second straight and fourth overall scoring title, finishing with 160 points (69 goals, 91 assists) in 60 games, beating out LaFontaine by 12 points.

Its so incredibly surreal when you consider that he was playing in an era with so many other hall of famers also in the peaks of their careers. And even with a half dead body he still was that much better than his peers.

In my mind, its quite possibly the most impressive performance by an individual in the history of pro sports.

Click to read more...

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Maybe it's semantics, but I draw a distinction between "most impressive" and "greatest".

I think Lemieux's 1992-93 campaign could very well be the most impressive season in hockey history (coming back to convincingly win the scoring title while fighting cancer and receiving chemotherapy).

But I also think it clearly isn't the greatest/best season. Objectively, Lemieux's production was more than 55 points behind Gretkzy's best season (offensively). It's tough to compare a forward to a defensmen, but I think Orr had multiple seasons where his level of performance was higher than Lemeiux's (take 1971 - he was only 21 points behind Le Magnifique, in a shorter season during a lower-scoring era, with vastly superior defensive play). No player in hockey history is so dominant that he can possibly have the greatest/best season, while missing a quarter of that season, even if it's for reasons that everyone has a lot of sympathy for.

Like I said, maybe it's semantics, but Lemieux absolutely has a case for the most impressive season - but not the greatest season.

 

[MadLuke]

I think it is completely legitimate to distinguish most impressive and greatest, I would even distinguish

- best
- most impressive
- greatest

Richard scoring 50 goal in 50 games is not necessarily better than 49 goal in 45 games but is much much "greater".

Actually winning the game 7 of the stanley cup final can have and will usually have nothing to do with how good your season was, but have a big impact on how great. Same for winning or loosing the Art Ross by 1 point, nothing to do with how good of a season you had but affect it's greatness.

 

[Samsquanch]

Maybe it's semantics, but I draw a distinction between "most impressive" and "greatest".

I think Lemieux's 1992-93 campaign could very well be the most impressive season in hockey history (coming back to convincingly win the scoring title while fighting cancer and receiving chemotherapy).

But I also think it clearly isn't the greatest/best season. Objectively, Lemieux's production was more than 55 points behind Gretkzy's best season (offensively). It's tough to compare a forward to a defensmen, but I think Orr had multiple seasons where his level of performance was higher than Lemeiux's (take 1971 - he was only 21 points behind Le Magnifique, in a shorter season during a lower-scoring era, with vastly superior defensive play). No player in hockey history is so dominant that he can possibly have the greatest/best season, while missing a quarter of that season, even if it's for reasons that everyone has a lot of sympathy for.

Like I said, maybe it's semantics, but Lemieux absolutely has a case for the most impressive season - but not the greatest season.

Fair points for sure. And I cant argue against your logic.

But the line between most impressive and greatest is a lot more blurred to me. He scored at a rate only done twice before by Gretzky (in a higher scoring era). He's not getting a gimmie because we feel bad for him and his battle with cancer.

He absolutely demolished the league, and was on pace to break all the records before the cancer diagnosis. He was on pace for the greatest statistical season of all time, and still managed to put up historic numbers while fighting for his life.

Still the greatest in my mind, but again I can respect that point of view.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I’d agree. Not a single player was ever as good as 92-93 Lemieux.

 

[MadLuke]

But the line between most impressive and greatest is a lot more blurred to me. He scored at a rate only done twice before by Gretzky (in a higher scoring era). He's not getting a gimmie because we feel bad for him and his battle with cancer.

I think that for scoring era for that type of player's playing first PP units and a lot of PP time, higher scoring era must take into account power play opportunity, for player playing first wave of PP the 1992-1993 season was a particularly high scoring season (would not surprise me if it has some most 100 points player's type of record).

NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Only 2005-2006 and 87-88 had more powerplays than 92-93 or 95-96 and 3.53 goal a game was not that less offense than 86-87 (3.56) or 87-88 (3.62), 92-93 was probably an has good season to produce point for first line player than some of the 80s year's.


Lemieux first 40 games before it's break (in a 3.53 goal by games league, 5.28 power play by game):
40 gp, 39 goals, 65 assists, 104 points, +32, 27 even strength goal., 2.6 points by game

Gretzky 1983-1984 (3.84 goal by games league, 4.2 power play by game)
first 51 game played: 61 goals, 92 assists for 153 points, 3 points by game

Lemieux gross adjustement 3.84/3.53 * 2.6 ppg = 2.82 ppg

Gretzky did 3.0 point by game on a longer run to start a season on a somewhat equivalent league, arguably worst for the first power play unit player's to produce in.

Top 5 without lemieux/greztky:

1992-1993
Lafontaine: 148
Oates : 142
Yzerman : 137
Selanne : 132
Turgeon : 132

1983-1984
Coffey : 126
Goulet : 122
Stastny : 119
Bossy : 118
Pederson : 116

All players in the top 10 of 92-93 would have won the Art Ross in 83-84 with that production if you remove Gretzky.

 

[Samsquanch]

I think that for scoring era for that type of player's playing first PP units and a lot of time, higher scoring era must take into account power play opportunity, for player playing first wave of PP the 1992-1993 season was a particularly high scoring season (would not surprise me if it has some most 100 points player's type of record).

NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Only 2005-2006 and 87-88 had more powerplays than 92-93 or 95-96 and 3.53 goal a game was not that less offense than 86-87 (3.56) or 87-88 (3.62), 92-93 was probably an has good season to produce point for first line player than some of the 80s year's.


Lemieux first 40 games before it's break (in a 3.53 goal by games league, 5.28 power play by game):
40 gp, 39 goals, 65 assists, 104 points, +32, 27 even strength goal., 2.6 points by game

Gretzky 1983-1984 (3.84 goal by games league, 4.2 power play by game)
first 51 game played: 61 goals, 92 assists for 153 points, 3 points by game

Lemieux gross adjustement 3.84/3.53 * 2.6 ppg = 2.82 ppg

Gretzky did 3.0 point by game on a longer run to start a season on a somewhat equivalent league, arguably better for the first power play unit player to produce.

1992-1993 top 5 without lemieux/greztky:
Lafontaine: 148 points
Oates: 142 points
Yzerman: 137 pts
Selanne: 132 pts
turgeon: 132 pts

1983-1984
Coffey: 126 points
Goulet: 122 points
stastny: 119 points
Bossy: 118 points
Pederson: 116 pts

All players in the top 10 of 92-93 would have won the Art Ross in 83-84 with that production if you remove Gretzky.

I appreciate the well thought out post. And I will certainly agree that the 92-93 season was high scoring.

But if the crux of your argument is that in Lemieux's 92-93 season it was easier to score in (versus the 80's), thats simply not true. The goals per game average is the most telling stat, in my opinion.

I saw the high flying 80's that featured Gretzky blowing pucks past standup goalies with slapshots from 40ft out the front of the net (and no traffic in front).

You will never be able to statistically account for the fact that goaltending rapidly improved from the 80's and into the 90's as the butterfly style became popular, and equipment (specifically the pads) became more and more bloated. Goals were scored in 92-93 at a high rate mostly because the talent level in the league was insane at that point.

As the talent levels rose, the goaltending improvements mostly balanced it out. But it was still much harder to score a goal in the 90's versus the 80's from a technical/skill standpoint imo.

I agree that any of those players you listed could have been art ross winners back in the 80's if not for Gretzky. They were all mostly future HHOF bound, or at the very least incredible players that have made lasting legacies in the league and for their teams.

Lemieux played and dominated in a far more talented era of players than Gretzky did. Which adds to his legacy in my mind, and to how special that season was in reality.

 

[MadLuke]

But if the crux of your argument is that in Lemieux's 92-93 season it was easier to score in, thats simply not true. The goals per game average is the most telling stat, in my opinion.

Not my crux of the argument is a bit different than that, it was not easier to score in 92-93, like you said more goals in 83-84. My argument was that it was for the players with a lot of power play time easier to accumulate points in 92-93, while it was harder to get points for everyone else to end up with a smaller total.

That why the 20 scorer in 92-93 had more points than in 83-84, 25% more power play opportunities.

It is true that the early 90s could have add the most talents in is prime, it really match well with the year's after the peak of the baby boom with the biggest talent pool in Canada history. While Turgeon was good, was he can beat everyone including offensive elite player playing with good offensive support Bossy, Stastny, by more than 10 points good ?

But many player's never had a season close to their 1992-1993 total in that list:

92-93 season vs second best season pts list

Lafontaine: 148 vs 105
Oates.....: 142 vs 115
Turgeon...: 132 vs 106
Selanne...: 132 vs 109
Gilmour...: 127 vs 111
Mogilny...: 127 vs 107
Robitaille: 125 vs 111
Reechi....: 123 vs 113
Sundin....: 114 vs 94
Tocchet...: 109 vs 96
Janney....: 106 vs 92
Joe Juneau: 102 vs 85

Everyone in that top 20 except for Lemieux (still is best ppg I think), Yzerman, Sakic, Hull, Fleury, Francis, Kevin Stevens (because he played only 72 games), Bure, Roenick, had their best offensive season, many by a large amount.

Lost of those player second best player do not beat a prime Mike Bossy 116 point season, this season was an anomaly that made it able for people to score a good 20% more than their best because of a very high amount of power play, terrible expansion team and so on. And a lot of those player were elite and consistent many season before and after, that peak production was not the result of a special Cheechoo case of injuring themselves right after or something like that, they had other season they competed for the art ross without coming close to their 92-93 total.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Mode note: If you don't find the topic interesting, you're free to not talk about it.

 

[Samsquanch]

Everyone in that top 20 except for Lemieux (still is best ppg I think), Yzerman, Sakic, Hull, Fleury, Francis, Kevin Stevens (because he played only 72 games), Bure, Roenick, had their best offensive season, many by a large amount.

I agree with your entire post for the most part. Especially the angle with the expansion teams (my own Sens had a historically bad season).

But Gretzky of all people should have had an advantage that year too (won the art ross the following year), and while he only played 45 games (15 less than mario), his PPG was below his standards.

So if Gretzky and the 9 guys above (most are HHOF caliber - and better players than the guys having career years) couldnt post career seasons/PPG totals with this supposed advantage, Im just not ready to call that year a huge anomaly and change my stance on Mario. We see plenty of 100+ point players before and after that season.

 

[MadLuke]

But Gretzky of all people should have had an advantage that year too (won the art ross the following year), and while he only played 45 games (15 less than mario), his PPG was below his standards.

So if Gretzky and the 9 guys above (most are HHOF) couldnt post career seasons/PPG totals, Im just not ready to call that year a huge anomaly and change my stance on Mario. We see plenty of 100+ point players before and after that season.

Gretzky had a career defining injury in 1991 Canada Cup and was thousand of professional game in is career, no one expected him to have a career peak there. Same with Yzerman, Yzerman had 108 and 103 points season before 92-93 local peak of 137 points, after 92-93 Yzerman will never make 100 points again, it was still an abnormal local peak for him.

Amount of 100 points player's in a season

1979-1980: 08
1980-1981: 12
1981-1982: 13
1982-1983: 11
1983-1984: 12
1984-1985: 16
1985-1986: 13
1986-1987: 07
1987-1988: 12
1988-1989: 09
1989-1990: 13
1990-1991: 10
1991-1992: 09
1992-1993: 21
1993-1994: 08
1994-1995: 07 player's with a 100 points point per games. (lock-out)
1995-1996: 12
1996-1997: 02
1997-1998: 01

I think 1992-1993 was close if not the best season for the top end talent to score points, but regardless if this is not true it was certainly close enough to a season like Gretzky prime to make Wayne 3 points per games in 51 games has impressive at least than 2.6 ppg for 40.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

The guy turned a 12 point deficit into a 12 point lead in a span of 20 games scoring 56 points. This after 2 months of radiation treatment.

What else can be said? Guy had back to back 5 goal games... 97 goals 224 point pace.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Gretzky had a career defining injury in 1991 Canada Cup and was thousand of professional game in is career, no one expected him to have a career peak there. Same with Yzerman, Yzerman had 108 and 103 points season before 92-93 local peak of 137 points, after 92-93 Yzerman will never make 100 points again, it was still an abnormal local peak for him.

Amount of 100 points player's in a season

1979-1980: 08
1980-1981: 12
1981-1982: 13
1982-1983: 11
1983-1984: 12
1984-1985: 16
1985-1986: 13
1986-1987: 07
1987-1988: 12
1988-1989: 09
1989-1990: 13
1990-1991: 10
1991-1992: 09
1992-1993: 21
1993-1994: 08
1994-1995: 07 player's with a 100 points point per games. (lock-out)
1995-1996: 12
1996-1997: 02
1997-1998: 01

I think 1992-1993 was close if not the best season for the top end talent to score points, but regardless if this is not true it was certainly close enough to a season like Gretzky prime to make Wayne 3 points per games in 51 games has impressive at least than 2.6 ppg for 40.

The early 90’s saw a huge infusion of European talent. The league was far better

 

[MadLuke]

The early 90’s saw a huge infusion of European talent. The league was far better

End 80s, early 90s was maybe peak high talent in history, right after 90 you see an infusion of Euro talent being bigger post Berlin wall going down combined with Canada biggest talent pool still being active and american kids growing up with miracle on ice (Roenick, Modano, Tkachuk, Guerin, etc...) arriving:

Canada birth rate

Around 55 to around 67 had a lot of Canadian baby with a peak around 1959, between 85 to 93 that talent pool was nhl age 18 to 38 year's old all together.

Even thought the absolute league talent was bigger the average player level of competition maybe not by that much, you had 5 more team in 92-93 versus 83-84, that 23% more teams.

Does the % of non north american make up for that level of dilution ? If you combine it with hockey getting popular in the US around 1980, yes but not by a special level, there is barely less Canadian player in the league in 92-93 than 83-84 (524 vs 544)

Percentage of player from outside North America:

83-84: 8.2%
92-93: 15.3%

Would the 92-93 NHL have been 21 to 23 teams with the same amount of powerplay than a regular season, it would have been harder to score points for the first liners, but that was not the case, 25% more powerplay augmenting the top line scorer proportion of team scoring and 23% more teams diluting the average strength, 84 games schedule probably explain with we see 21 100 points player's, more than the double of player's than the 2 season after or before.

Level of talent of the league is one conversation, how easy it was to score point is an other, linked but still 2 different conversation.

2005-2006 high scoring was not due to the league being that much more talented than in 2015, how the games was refereed and power plays opportunity explain most of the difference.

 

[JackSlater]

I suppose that the first reply already nailed it, but yes as impressive as that season was it isn't greater than the best Gretzky or Orr seasons.

 

[Damisoph]

That was a magical season.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Almost dying has a way to jumpstart you though.I've had a few dangerous health problems happen to me and as soon as I was back healthy I tended to accomplish a great deal in the following monthes, as if my drive to live was much stronger than usual.

Just think what happened to Patrick Kane after his life was almost screwed by criminal accusations.He had his spike year immediately after.

As far as Lemieux in 92-93, no player since, including him, has reached that level of play.It was the last time we saw a "Top 4" peak level.

 

[Troubadour]

When you take into consideration he played that season with cancer and post-radiation, it's quite crazy.

 

[The Panther]

Lemieux's overcoming cancer is indeed a great event, deservedly celebrated. But as far as the 1992-93 season goes, I mean, a lump on your neck doesn't interfere with hockey ability.

I agree with the idea (above) that Lemieux, and his teammates, likely got a big psychological lift when Mario came back. Maybe they were peaking anyway, and then Lemieux's comeback pushed everyone to new levels.

I wonder, though, if Mario's radiation treatments didn't fatigue him once the big high of overcoming the cancer wore off. He seemed to slow down as the playoffs went on, then barely played for two years.

As far as the greatest season ever goes... his team choked in the playoffs and he missed 24 games. The competition is pretty stiff when it comes to the single greatest season ever.

 

[Asheville]

The brainfart against NYI and everyone and their mothers padding their stats against the Sharks, Senators and Lightning takes plenty of shine off of Lemieux's '92-'93

 

[Troubadour]

But as far as the 1992-93 season goes, I mean, a lump on your neck doesn't interfere with hockey ability.

It may interfere with the ability to stay alive, which seems pretty necessary to make any use of hockey skills. Any way you slice it, Mario was not healthy. He played 40 games at a 104 point pace -- and here we go -- with cancer, which, at any stage, represents the opposite of being healthy.

 

[Troubadour]

The brainfart against NYI and everyone and their mothers padding their stats against the Sharks, Senators and Lightning takes plenty of shine off of Lemieux's '92-'93

If everyone padded their stats against the expansion teams, it only underscores that Lemieux was on another level from everyone, their mothers included.

 

[Asheville]

If everyone padded their stats against the expansion teams, it only underscores that Lemieux was on another level from everyone, their mothers included.

Lemieux has a history of performing better with increased rest, so it makes sense that having suffered through 24 fewer games than his opponents would give him a leg up.

We need to stop acting like he had stage 4 brain cancer. It was known from the get-go it wouldn't be fatal.

 

[Troubadour]

Lemieux has a history of performing better with increased rest, so it makes sense that having suffered through 24 fewer games than his opponents would give him a leg up.

We need to stop acting like he had stage 4 brain cancer. It was known from the get-go it wouldn't be fatal.

Everyone has a history of performing better with increased rest. Only Lemieux has a history of performing better after radiation treatment.

 

[Asheville]

Everyone has a history of performing better with increased rest. Only Lemieux has a history of performing better after radiation treatment.

Up until it mattered. And with an injured Gretzky playing even fewer games to go up against. And an unbelievably diluted talent pool (3 expansion teams in 2 years; then 5 in 3 years). Joe Juneau and Craig Janney with 100+ points. Not putting a lot of stock in '92-'93. And if you want to have the title of greatest season, you've got to complete the job. Most fascinating season? Sure. Not the best.