You know, I was thinking about one of the 'complaints' you will hear about stars in most sports today -- that they don't have the number of championship rings that so-and-so had from back in the 50s. Obviously, it was 'easier' to win a cup in the O6 era when you just look at it in terms of probability. In a given year 16.67 percent of all players would win the cup (assuming static rosters). Today that percentage is down to 3.33. One way to level the playing field would be to calculate how many rings he won vs. the number of expected rings just based on pure chance. But a stat like that tends to punish longevity in the league. So then I was thinking that instead, you could give a guy a point for each team in the league the year he won a ring. So Gretzky would have 84 RingPoints. But this way seems to be harsh on guys who won it during the O6 era. After all, there is still something to be said for actually winning it. And it hardly seems right that a one-ring guy in today's NHL would automagically be comparable to a five-ring guy in the O6 era. So I think if such a stat was to be calculated, RingPoints should be assigned as the square root of the number of teams in the league (despite the obvious inclusion of decimals). So for instance, a one-ring guy in today's NHL would be roughly equivalent to a two-ring guy in the O6 era. Gretzky's four-rings would be roughly equivalent to a guy winning seven rings in the O6 era or a guy winning 3 rings in today's NHL. So my question is, given that metric, who is the all-time leader in this stupid stat. Is there nybody with a player database who can run a query on this? (If it helps, I can write some pseudoSQL for you -- though without knowing your DB structure it is likely to be of marginal use).