Scott Stevens' scoring drop-off after 1995-ish

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
So, I'm wondering what happened to Scott Stevens' point totals after the Work Stoppage in 1995?

For context:

In 1993-94 (kind of the 90s-Devils' / Brodeur's "break-out" season), Stevens had an impressive 78 points (for reference, that is only 6 fewer points than Mark Messier). He led New Jersey in scoring, while finishing 2nd in Norris voting! This style was obviously working for him, as he also had an NHL-best +53 and New Jersey had a 106-point season (best in franchise history).

1995 is the Work Stoppage mini-season. The Devils have kind of a middling season, and Stevens moves down to 5th in team scoring (but still best among team defenceman, ahead of young Niedermayer). In the playoffs, of course, the Devils catch fire when beating Boston and go on to win the Stanley Cup in convincing fashion. Stevens is 11th in team scoring in the playoffs.

Contrary to popular belief, the Devils do not win by merely shutting down other teams' offenses; they themselves score a healthy 67 goals in 20 games en route to the Cup.

Then, in 1995-96, the Devils have a little setback as they fall to .524 on the season and are the second-weakest offense in the League. Stevens falls to 8th in team scoring, but production-wise plummets to 28 points (exactly 70 fewer points than his previous full season... for the same team... and the same coach).

The Devils improve offensive in 1996-97 and go back to being one of the stronger teams in the League, but Stevens does not recover offensively, putting up merely 24 points (11th on the club). The rest of his career plays out like this, offensively speaking.

So, it seems clear that Stevens could have (and under normal circumstances, would have) produced more offensively after the Work Stoppage, so I'm wondering if there was a conscious decision made, with Jacques Lemaire, that Stevens would take an offensive back-seat to Niedermayer? It's just rare to see a player, still strong and in his prime, still in an offensive season (1995-96, somewhat 1996-97), still on a strong team, suddenly plummet in scoring so drastically.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,131
Regina, SK
I mentioned this in the top-100 project:

like many non-powerhouse defensemen, his raw point totals were often heavily influenced by whether he was getting prime PP time or not. His adjusted ESP for his first 21 seasons: 18, 22, 25, 31, 32, 31, 25, 17, 26, 33, 32, 50, 30, 18, 19, 28, 29, 27, 23, 18, 20. You look at seasons like 98, 99, 00, and he was scoring basically as many adjusted ESP as he was in 86, 87, 88.

1994 is a massive spike, but other than that, it's rather steady through 2001. PP time massively influences all defenseman's point totals.

The fact that the DPE started after his 1994 spike also helps to exaggerate his supposed drop in production. If you break it up into 3, 4 season segments, yes, it was dropping over time, but it wasn't a considerable amount and it honestly might be a lot less drastic than you'd expect age-related decine to cause.
 

Howie Hodge

Zombie Woof
Sep 16, 2017
4,422
4,027
Buffalo, NY
Scott Stevens was asked to play the role of shut down defense,man.

He accepted and excelled in the role.

The Devils won Stanley Cups.

Amen.

Scott on being asked to become a more defensive minded defenseman in New Jersey:

"I've been asked to play a certain role here, which doesn't help in that area (offensive stats). But I feel that gives the team a chance to win every night. That's the satisfaction I get."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Voight

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
I understand both responses (above), but I guess I'm still wondering about this:
- 1994: Stevens plays offensively, Devils have great season
- 1996: Stevens doesn't play offensively, Devils struggle to score and have middling season

Based on this, I'm not really seeing why he was asked to play a purely defensive role. I guess the key must be the '95 Cup win. They (Lemaire, Stevens, et al.) must have come to the conclusion that it wasn't necessary for him to produce on the power-play or whatnot (although that may have been a premature conclusion, as the team couldn't score in 1995-96).
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
I understand both responses (above), but I guess I'm still wondering about this:
- 1994: Stevens plays offensively, Devils have great season
- 1996: Stevens doesn't play offensively, Devils struggle to score and have middling season

Based on this, I'm not really seeing why he was asked to play a purely defensive role. I guess the key must be the '95 Cup win. They (Lemaire, Stevens, et al.) must have come to the conclusion that it wasn't necessary for him to produce on the power-play or whatnot (although that may have been a premature conclusion, as the team couldn't score in 1995-96).


Everyone is overlooking the obvious. 1993-94 Devils had 400 PP opportunities, down to 288 by 1996-97.

Furthermore, the "neutral zone trap" has specific demands. Lemaire preferred his anchor defenceman on the ice post PP instead of during with minimal threatening offensive play.
 

blood gin

Registered User
Jan 17, 2017
4,174
2,203
A lot of it was Lemaire. Of course some was age related but Jacques actually went to him and asked him to play a more defensive minded game and take less chances

That 95-96 team was a disaster offensively. But not a bad team. Certainly at that time they were perhaps the greatest team in NHL history to miss the playoffs. Lamoriello dropped the ball that season waiting too long to bring in offensive reinforcements
 

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,589
4,548
Behind A Tree
He was such a good defenseman. Seems like he handled the switch from offensive defenseman to defensive defenseman rather easily.
 

ESH

Registered User
Jun 19, 2011
5,294
3,394
I’ve been wondering this for awhile and I’d be thankful to hear from people that got to see him play over his career.

Would you say Stevens was better in his later career (post-94) with the Devils or earlier in his career (pre-90) with the Capitals? Assuming that his peak was in the early 90s with the Devils.
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,834
15,210
San Diego
Drop in PP production/usage for sure. In 1993-94, Stevens had 5 goals and 21 assists on the PP. He'd only have 8 PP goals in the following 9+ seasons in the NHL. And I'd wager a donut that the 3 PP goals he got in 2000-01 were during Scott Niedermayer's 20 game holdout at the beginning of that season.

As pointed out, the Devils were really low on PP opportunities. One thing that seemed to be consistent about the 95-04 Devils was that they'd be one of the least penalized teams in the league but also ranked near the bottom in penalties drawn. So the Devils played much more at even strength than virtually everybody else.

ESPN only goes back to 2000-01, but here are the Devils ranking #30 in PP opportunities: 2000-01 NHL Hockey Stats and League Leaders - Special Teams - National Hockey League - ESPN

But also yielded the 2nd fewest PP opportunities: 2000-01 NHL Hockey Stats and League Leaders - Special Teams - National Hockey League - ESPN

Along with Stevens becoming more of a stay at home guy at even strength, I think there was just a changing of the guard in 1995 where Niedermayer got trusted with more ice time and took over the top PP unit. And then when Brian Rafalski joined the team in 1999-00, I don't recall Stevens getting regular PP time again after that.
 

GMR

Registered User
Jul 27, 2013
6,064
5,038
Parts Unknown
I always thought the dropoff was related to the Devils' style of play and the role he was asked to play.

The only other theory I had is that he started spending more time hanging out with Ken Daneyko during this period and it rubbed off on his play.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,418
Vancouver, BC
As others have stated, the arrival of Scott Niedermayer pushed Stevens off the top PP unit where he’d recorded 50% of his points in most of his best offensive years.

Plus league scoring fell 30% at this same time.

If you look at his adjusted ES points and then throw on the 15-20 PP points he’d have picked up playing on the #1 PP all year, the dropoff wasn’t nearly as large as it looks at first glance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fixxer

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
I understand both responses (above), but I guess I'm still wondering about this:
- 1994: Stevens plays offensively, Devils have great season
- 1996: Stevens doesn't play offensively, Devils struggle to score and have middling season

Based on this, I'm not really seeing why he was asked to play a purely defensive role. I guess the key must be the '95 Cup win. They (Lemaire, Stevens, et al.) must have come to the conclusion that it wasn't necessary for him to produce on the power-play or whatnot (although that may have been a premature conclusion, as the team couldn't score in 1995-96).

You pretty much nailed it. I don't know what happened in that off season but Lemaire must have really been stung over that loss to the Rangers especially coming so close. Maybe he sat down with Stevens - and it appears he did - and asked him to take on a more defensive approach even if it meant sacrificing points. It worked. The Devils breezed through the 1995 playoffs and Stevens was a beast that year. Think of the Kozlov hit.

Other things I am thinking and noticing. In the playoffs up until 1995 Stevens quite often was a minus. I don't know why, but maybe his extra effort on defense was what was needed to win. He is +10, +9 and +14 in the three Cups the Devils win, leading the postseason in two of those.

I know it doesn't explain much about his regular season drop off and why a coach wouldn't just let him keep doing what he was doing but clamping up a little more helped didn't it? Do the Devils win any of those Cups without him? No.

This isn't new either. Red Kelly was shifted to forward once he was traded to the Leafs. Steve Yzerman at the time where he was putting up video game-esque numbers offensively was asked to take a different role for the team and they won too. All of these teams won and maybe they don't without the transition.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->