Top 5 NHL Player Regular Seasons of the 1990s! (skaters only)

[MadLuke]

You serious with this? Jagr won the art ross by 20 points. Lemieux won by 12 while playing 24 less games than the second leading scorer. Also put up the 2nd N third highest goal and ppg ratio in history.

Well like I said he is a clean case of the best per game.

But winning the Art Ross by 20 points in a very low scoring environment on that penguins team can have an serious argument over winning an art ross by 12 in one of the highest scoring season in history for stars (if not the cleanly the highest) on that 92-93 Pens team, not have being a better or has good of an hockey player obviously, but missing a single game instead of 24 compensate.

I am not wed to the idea, they are virtually nill to me, specially that the 92-93 Penguins 60 games with Mario were much better (in winning and so on) than without, for him to have an argument for sure. But that peak Jagr would have won the Art Ross in 70 games and would have lead is team in scoring after 53 games that year.

Jagr beat peak Selanne playing with Kariya by 18.6%, Lemieux beat peak Lafontaine playing with Mogilny (that about the equivalent competition imo) by 8%, doing it with only 60 games make him obviously the much better hockey player, which is not a debate here, but that not how I understood the question that asked to take into account missed game and talked in lenght about the missed game in the opening post.

Seems that the 1992-1993 season was the most impressive in terms of individual performance

Selanne (98-99 and 96-97) > 92-93 imo, 92-93 had the benefit of being around the all time talent peak (or at least a peak) with Euros being more open and Russia getting in, top Canadian, USA being strong, etc... but the big numbers are a structural result of PP, expansion teams, ads break, etc...

 

[tarheelhockey]

The second the Norris trophy came into being, Defensemen stopped getting consideration for the Hart. I don't think this is a coincidence.

Never thought about it in those terms before. That simple fact says so much about Hart voting and award voting in general.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This is a really good point

Like if you drop Hedman onto the Oilers, I'd (like to) think we'd start winning games and be among the best in the league (ignore the cap implications for this hypothetical).

But I guarantee it would be McDavid and Drai getting all the Hart buzz

Doesn't even have to be a hypothetical. Look at Kucherov's Hart record against Hedman's.

 

[NigerianNightmare]

Well like I said he is a clean case of the best per game.

But winning the Art Ross by 20 points in a very low scoring environment on that penguins team can have an serious argument over winning an art ross by 12 in one of the highest scoring season in history for stars (if not the cleanly the highest) on that 92-93 Pens team, not have being a better or has good of an hockey player obviously, but missing a single game instead of 24 compensate.

I am not wed to the idea, they are virtually nill to me, specially that the 92-93 Penguins 60 games with Mario were much better (in winning and so on) than without, for him to have an argument for sure. But that peak Jagr would have won the Art Ross in 70 games and would have lead is team in scoring after 53 games that year.

Jagr beat peak Selanne playing with Kariya by 18.6%, Lemieux beat peak Lafontaine playing with Mogilny (that about the equivalent competition imo) by 8%, doing it with only 60 games make him obviously the much better hockey player, which is not a debate here, but that not how I understood the question that asked to take into account missed game and talked in lenght about the missed game in the opening post.



Selanne (98-99 and 96-97) > 92-93 imo, 92-93 had the benefit of being around the all time talent peak (or at least a peak) with Euros being more open and Russia getting in, top Canadian, USA being strong, etc... but the big numbers are a structural result of PP, expansion teams, ads break, etc...

Sure you are right. But let's agree - scoring 76 goals as a rookie who just came over from Europe is something truly amazing

 

[ResilientBeast]

Doesn't even have to be a hypothetical. Look at Kucherov's Hart record against Hedman's.

But they also have one of the best goalies in the league and perhaps one of the deepest teams

 

[GMR]

I think I mostly agree with @jigglysquishy, but I would maybe run it like this:

1. Lemieux 1992-93
I'm normally wary of the 60-game season as top, but it's Lemieux and he was just too good this year. Total dominance at even strength, on the power play, goal scoring, assists, etc. One of the very greatest seasons of all time.

2A. Gretzky 1990-91
I don't find much to choose between this one and Mario '96. Similar production, but 103 ES points for Wayne with considerably less impressive offensive teammates.

2B. Lemieux 1995-96
69 goals in 70 games, and total power play dominance. Lemieux was past his physical peak here, but was still clearly the best player in the world.

4. Jágr 1998-99
127 points in this low-scoring period is just crazy and this was one of the most team-dominant offensive seasons in NHL history.

5. Chris Pronger 1999-00
I'm more of a fan of Bourque ('91, etc.) and Leetch ('92), but I think this Pronger Hart trophy season was pretty unbelievable. Over 30 minutes a night, and a +52 in that low-scoring period is crazy good. The Blues dominated the League despite not having any 80-point players, and they did it with defense, i.e., Pronger, the hardest player in the League then to play against.


Pretty tough competition here when I'm leaving off an 86-goal season (Hull) and some late-peak Bourque, Chelios, etc. But there it is.

Pronger's Hart trophy should have gone to Bure.

I would replace that with Gretzky's 1993-1994 season.

 

[MadLuke]

I would replace that with Gretzky's 1993-1994 season.

I would like to see the argument for that one, a team that made the playoff comfortably the year with 45 games of Gretzky end up 22 of 26 when he is having one of the best 5 season of the whole decade the season right after ?

Voter can be quite off and expectation were strange when it came for him, but Gretzky > Fedorov that season ?

 

[GMR]

I would like to see the argument for that one, a team that made the playoff comfortably the year with 45 games of Gretzky end up 22 of 26 when he is having one of the best 5 season of the whole decade the season right after ?

Voter can be quite off and expectation were strange when it came for him, but Gretzky > Fedorov that season ?

His offensive numbers were spectacular. 130 points in 81 games. His last dominant season. What else could he do? He didn't play goalie. The Kings gave up a ton of goals in both 1993 and 1994. If we're only focused on individual seasons, that should be mentioned. Fedorov has been mentioned several times already. Just wanted to throw Wayne's season in the there as well.

 

[tabness]

To add some not mentioned already: Yzerman and Chelios in 1992-1993, Coffey in 1995, I feel like one of Roenick's early nineties years should be given some love, and maybe include Kevin Stevens from the early nineties as well

 

[MadLuke]

His offensive numbers were spectacular. 130 points in 81 games. His last dominant season. What else could he do? He didn't play goalie. The Kings gave up a ton of goals in both 1993 and 1994. If we're only focused on individual seasons, that should be mentioned. Fedorov has been mentioned several times already. Just wanted to throw Wayne's season in the there as well.

Not get significantly outscored by the opposition when he was on the ice ? Goaltender were not an big issue that year I think .894 was above the league average of .893.

It is not like the Kings were good when Gretzky was on the ice and terrible when he was not, large ice time and strong opposition factor going on obviously but -25 was the worst on the Kings.

Los Angeles save percentage and penalty killing units were both around the league average. It does feel a bit revisionist, is it not the single Art Ross winner to not get a single Hart vote in history or something of the sort ?

 

[GMR]

Not get significantly outscored by the opposition when he was on the ice ? Goaltender were not an big issue that year I think .894 was above the league average of .893.

It is not like the Kings were good when Gretzky was on the ice and terrible when he was not, large ice time and strong opposition factor going on obviously but -25 was the worst on the Kings.

Los Angeles save percentage and penalty killing units were both around the league average. It does feel a bit revisionist, is it not the single Art Ross winner to not get a single Hart vote in history or something of the sort ?

Not surprising considering they missed the playoffs.

Are you saying Gretzky was a better two-way center in 1993 than 1994? Did he backcheck harder that year? Or in 1991? I don't remember him ever being strong defensively.

 

[MadLuke]

Are you saying Gretzky was a better two-way center in 1993 than 1994? Did he backcheck harder that year? Or in 1991? I don't remember him ever being strong defensively.

Prime Gretzky was one of the best 2 forward ever depending how we define it, is all time ev dominance was shut after Suter, he could have relatively flash of it after for a playoff run like 1993 or a stretch during a season, but it was not the same over 80 games effort.

He was even a good PK player in is days.

Puck possession is by far the best defense, elite skating are ways to have strong defense, being good at clearing the puck from your zone when you get it, predicting play and shutting down pass lane a la Datsyuk, Gretzky had ways to tilt the ice and had some of the most impressive +/- season of all time.

I go with impression, being a Montreal/Nordiques fan in 1994 that did not watch many Gretzky game a year that he does not make the playoff, but the vibe was not that he was delivering the best season of all skater just that year, let alone of a decade.

 

[scott clam]

Lemieux 93
Fedorov 94
Lemieux 96
Jagr 99
Jagr 96