Which years do we consider weaker years due to World War 2?

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

My personal impression is that 1939, 1940, 1941, and 1942 are all effectively "full-strength" NHL seasons, Im on the fence regarding 1943, and 1944, 1945 are essentially AHL equivalent or lower. The most important piece of evidence for this is the list of important names that are absent for 1944-1945, the presence of players that clearly seem to have been regarded as not NHL quality (ie Buzinski), and the rapid changes in the performance of some teams (ie see the war year Rangers who go from a good defensive team to one of the worst of all time in the span of 1940-1943).

Do we factor this in when considering major awards voting, team cup counts, and other all-time rankings?

Are there any reasonably founded doubts about the quality of the league immediately postwar, and in the next 5 or so years following it?

Click to read more...

 

[tarheelhockey]

This was recently discussed in intricate detail here:
What's with the disrespect of Maurice Richard?

And here:
What are your thoughts about Richard's 1944/45 season?

 

[Vilica]

Are there any reasonably founded doubts about the quality of the league immediately postwar, and in the next 5 or so years following it?

I think the most important player to answer your question is Ted Kennedy. I think examining Kennedy's regular season statistical record and how it breaks down provides the most enlightening insight into the state of the postwar NHL, and answers questions as varied as to why Gordie Howe's dominated the scoring race and why scoring collapsed in the early 50s.

 

[daver]

My personal impression is that 1939, 1940, 1941, and 1942 are all effectively "full-strength" NHL seasons, Im on the fence regarding 1943, and 1944, 1945 are essentially AHL equivalent or lower. The most important piece of evidence for this is the list of important names that are absent for 1944-1945, the presence of players that clearly seem to have been regarded as not NHL quality (ie Buzinski), and the rapid changes in the performance of some teams (ie see the war year Rangers who go from a good defensive team to one of the worst of all time in the span of 1940-1943).

Do we factor this in when considering major awards voting, team cup counts, and other all-time rankings?

Are there any reasonably founded doubts about the quality of the league immediately postwar, and in the next 5 or so years following it?

I think the number of players absent from the league from the previous season are as follows:

42/43 - 43 players

43/44- 30 players (73 total absent)

44/45 - five returned (68 total absent)


Certainly a significant figure. As for questioning individual awards, it's not unreasonable to wonder if there might have been better competition but cannot say with any amount of certainty as that gets too far into the arena of speculation.

Richard won goal titles in a dominant fashion after the war years, Lach won another scoring title in 47/48, Bentley won the Art Ross in 42/43 against many of the top scorers from the previous season (s). There are many more examples of players scoring within a reasonably acceptable range relative to their peers before, during, and after the war years to not automatically question anybody's scoring finishes.

As for wondering if raw point and goal totals from those years need context? They always do; the war years are no different.

As for wondering if the post war years need context? Hard to say. There really isn't an unusual turnover of the Top Ten scorers year to year starting in 40/41 thru to 48/49:

1941/42 - six new Top Ten scorers* (includes one player who missed some time but had a Top 5 PPG)

1942/43 - six new Top Ten scorers *

1943/44 - seven new Top Ten scorers*

1944/45 - eight new Top Ten scorers*

1945/46 - five new Top Ten scorers* (includes two from 42/43 Top Ten scorers)

1946/47 - five new Top Ten scorers* (includes four players from Top Tens before 42/43)

1947/48 - five new Top Ten scorer (includes two from the war years), two pre-war players stayed in Top Ten

1948/49 - seven new Top Ten scorers * (includes one from Top Tens before 42/43), one pre-war Top Ten player stayed in Top Ten


It seems like there are enough players staying in the Top Ten year to year that questioning the value of seasons is hardly obvious. Penciling in two or three missing players into the "war years" Top Tens seems reasonable.

Post-war saw some of the elite pre-war scorers return to the Top Ten and a handful of the elite war year scorers stay in the Top Ten. Not sure there is much evidence to say that the post war years were affected that much.

 

[Big Phil]

1944 and 1945 are the classic "war" seasons. 1946 I consider it to be full strength again. 1943? That's a tougher one. I'd say for the most part this is not a "war" year like the other two. You can see it just based on the scoring leaders. The leaders are similar to other years where as 1944 and 1945 there were different names popping up that wouldn't normally be there. Herb Cain winning the scoring title in 1944. Maybe that is similar to someone like Phil Kessel winning the scoring title. By the way, Cain gets a bad rap. I wouldn't put him in the HHOF, but he played a decent amount of time in the NHL - 13 years. Was always a decent scorer, not great, but capable. Won a couple of Cups too. Lived a full life.

 

[The Panther]

We would need to see the actual number of regular players who departed, season-by-season. I suspect the numbers aren't as big as people think.

My guess would be 1942-43 somewhat affected, 1943-44 much affected, and 1944-45 likewise. Probably 1945-46 is marginally affected, but not much. After that, business as usual.

 

[JackSlater]

They're all valid seasons. Some are certainly significantly affected by WW2 though. It's already been discussed as noted in the thread above. I counted out the players I deemed regular NHLers, as in players who played at least 50% of a team's games in the previous year, who left prior to a given season due to WW2.

1942: 5
1943: 43
1944: 30
1945: 7

A few players returned by 1945 but not a big number. There are also various players who left the AHL due to WW2 and thus couldn't be NHL callups, and there were promising young players who presumably had their careers delayed due to WW2 and wouldn't make their debuts until after 1945. I would say that the NHL was significantly impacted by WW2 in 1943 but then this effect was made worse by 1944, which was roughly on par with 1945.

It's very difficult to gauge the after effects but you would have to think that the NHL was weaker for WW2 having happened in the years that followed 1945. You had some players who simply left hockey due to WW2, some who actually served in regular military settings and would obviously be rusty, and then there is the disruption to society when almost all of the players come from one country, and a huge proportion of the young men in that country are put into the war effort in some capacity. Frank Selke realized this at the time and said: "I realized that young players in the services would not return to hockey as probable stars. The years that would have improved their ability were being spent in the army.”

MONTREAL’S GREY-FLANNEL HOCKEY CARTEL | Maclean's | DECEMBER 3, 1960

 

[Jumptheshark]

it should be noted that many Canadian born players who played on US teams and wanted to join were not allowed to join until the USA entered after Pearl Harbor.