Will Auston Matthews break Rick Vaive's record this season?

[Rants Mulliniks]

A huge percentage of 50+ goal seasons happened in the 80s and we did not have much elite talent back then. Still it is odd, we have been short on All-Star level talent for a lot of years, luckily that is the past.

Yup. Feat of over 55 wasn't accomplished until after expansion, so years the franchise has been around is kind of irrelevant. It has only been achieved 61 times in league history and many by the same players.

 

[North Cole]

Jesus tap dancing christ! Learn your hockey history guys! Rick Vaive is one of only 3 players to score 50 goals with the Toronto Maple Leafs! Only 5 times has someone been able to score 50 goals with the Toronto Maple Leafs in their 100 year history and Rick Vaive was the guy to do it 3 of those 5 times! The only other players to do it was Dave Andreychuk in the early high scoring 90s and Gary Leeman. Gary Leeman was only able to do it because he had a mullet during te season he scored 51 goals.

Rick Vaive could've been one of the all time greats but he eventually cracked under the pressure from the Toronto media and fans. Legend has it he was a Mike Bossy level talent and should've had at least 7 50 goal seasons in a row. Instead he only had 3 straight 50 goal seasons during his peak. But once he left Toronto, a old broken down Rick Vaive, way past his prime, was still able to put up 43 goals playing for Chicago in 1987-88.

Oh, it's just Leafs history. Explains why people dont know who he is.

Thought it was an important record or something. Yes Matthew's will set a new one.

 

[North Cole]

It still surprises me a bit, but maybe I figured more who post on here are interested not just in the present, but the history of hockey as well. I mean, Steve Shutt was before my time, and while I couldn't really describe to you how he played or what his best strengths and weaknesses as a player are, I've at least heard of him and have a vague idea of the kind of totals he put up. I figured that would be the same for hockey fans who weren't born yet when Vaive played.

Not necessarily, that's why there is a separate sub forum for people interested in hockey history.

Whether people have heard of him or not doesn't really impact their opinions on present day hockey. That's an arbitrary threshold to enforce, even to a "tertiary" degree. HF would need to start quizzing people when they sign up, in which case we wouldnt have much of a forum.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Never ceases to amaze me how little star offensive talent the Leafs have had for literally a century.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Regardless of whether or not everyone "should" know this Vaive guy, the OP should do some due dilligence and add some context for those who aren't keeping up to date on every Leafs player to ever play for them.

Or maybe don't vote and comment if you don't know who somebody is and you don't want to bother putting in any effort yourself?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Never ceases to amaze me how little star offensive talent the Leafs have had for literally a century.

To reiterate, the feat was never accomplished until post expansion and only 61 times in league history, often by the same guys. It's not really shocking unless you don't know the rarity of it.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

To reiterate, the feat was never accomplished until post expansion and only 61 times in league history, often by the same guys. It's not really shocking unless you don't know the rarity of it.

A Leaf player has never won the Art Ross and the last time a Leaf player won the goal scoring title was 1948.

 

[John Johnson]

Or maybe don't vote and comment if you don't know who somebody is and you don't want to bother putting in any effort yourself?

OR maybe this should just be put on the Leafs subforum. Not everyone cares about the Leafs.

 

[Dekes For Days]

OR maybe this should just be put on the Leafs subforum. Not everyone cares about the Leafs.

Or you can ignore the thread that has every right to be in a forum that discusses questions regarding all teams, not just ones you don't have an irrational hate for.

 

[John Johnson]

Or you can ignore the thread that has every right to be in a forum that discusses questions regarding all teams, not just ones you don't have an irrational hate for.

Its not an irrational hate lmao why are you so insecure? If you're gonna make a thread about your team and its records or whatever add some context otherwise it might as well be a thread for only Leaf fans.

 

[OilCanada92]

Oh, it's just Leafs history. Explains why people dont know who he is.

Thought it was an important record or something. Yes Matthew's will set a new one.

The ego is amazing, isn't it? That would be like me getting mad at a younger Leafs fan 20 years from now for not knowing who Doug Weight is.

Young Leafs fans are not going to know who Doug Weight is 20 years from now, and they're definitely not going to know the significance of his 100 point season to the Oilers.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If you're gonna make a thread about your team and its records or whatever add some context otherwise it might as well be a thread for only Leaf fans.

Or for people who populate a hockey forum and have some hockey knowledge, and/or people who have access to google.

 

[John Johnson]

Or for people who populate a hockey forum and have some hockey knowledge, and/or people who have access to google.

Wouldn't it have just been more beneficial to all if the OP just added the simple record that Matthews is trying to break? I don't see why this is such an issue, its a simple and necessary request. Also why do you start all your posts with "or"?

 

[pcruz]

The Rick Vaive record is a record I thought would never be broken in my lifetime. What a time to be alive!

It’s not 92 or 86.
It’s not 76 for a rookie.

53 isn’t the most outlandish number in the world.

 

[John Johnson]

If I want to address you specifically I will do so. It's not all about you. There are multiple posters commenting about not knowing who Vaive is.

What is petty is you thinking their was a "veiled" post directed at you specifically. lol

I will say the OP could/should have stated which record he was referring to.

Fair enough if it wasn't directed only to me, but you are grouping me with those posters so Id rather not be insulted over something very trivial. Bolded in your post is all I, and probably many other posters, were asking for. Don't see why it caused such an upset.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Wouldn't it have just been more beneficial to all if the OP just added the simple record that Matthews is trying to break?

Wouldn't it have just been more beneficial to all if you put in a little effort yourself, or stayed out of a topic that you were uninformed in? You said yourself that you don't care about the Leafs.

He's a fairly well-known historically relevant player that holds one of the most recognized records for the most followed and one of the longest standing franchises in the league. There doesn't always have to be a history lesson attached to discussions about significant hockey players on a hockey forum. It was answered on the first page anyway.

 

[Iapyi]

Fair enough if it wasn't directed only to me, but you are grouping me with those posters so Id rather not be insulted over something very trivial. Bolded in your post is all I, and probably many other posters, were asking for. Don't see why it caused such an upset.

lol. My post, which has been deleted for whatever reason beyond me, did not quote you, nor was it in any manner intended for you. I think someone is feeling a tad bit of bloated self worth.

 

[John Johnson]

Wouldn't it have just been more beneficial to all if you put in a little effort yourself, or stayed out of a topic that you were uninformed in? You said yourself that you don't care about the Leafs.

He's a fairly well-known historically relevant player that holds one of the most recognized records for the most followed and one of the longest standing franchises in the league. There doesn't always have to be a history lesson attached to discussions about significant hockey players on a hockey forum. It was answered on the first page anyway.

I don't get why you're so upset about it, also don't know why you keep copying the first part of my sentences in your replies. Context matters thats all, it was a pretty simple ask.

 

[North Cole]

Wouldn't it have just been more beneficial to all if you put in a little effort yourself, or stayed out of a topic that you were uninformed in? You said yourself that you don't care about the Leafs.

He's a fairly well-known historically relevant player that holds one of the most recognized records for the most followed and one of the longest standing franchises in the league. There doesn't always have to be a history lesson attached to discussions about significant hockey players on a hockey forum. It was answered on the first page anyway.

There does, if it's about a historical record... Breaking a record itself references that something happened in history.

As evidenced by this thread, he perhaps is not fairly well-known, at least to posters whom do not follow the franchise with which he is associated. Not that the OP conveys the message that we are talking about a franchise record anyways.

Lastly, I dont understand why you want uninformed people to stay out of the topic/thread. If you are happy the thread is on the mainboard because it recognizes (and spreads awareness of) what Matthews could potentially accomplish, you by definition, want more people to be informed about it. Which means the OP should actually provide the data, rather than tertiary sources and citing a name. Offering more information makes people more receptive to actually research the in depth details themselves. Its hilariously lazy to not even type the essence of the record - most goals play a Leaf player in one season.

Wouldnt you want to inform people about your franchise history? Rather than be obtuse and condescending? It seems to make you proud.

 

[Dekes For Days]

There does, if it's about a historical record...

No. There doesn't.

As evidenced by this thread, he perhaps is not fairly well-known

Maybe not to you, but he's very well known.

If you are happy the thread is on the mainboard because it recognizes (and spreads awareness of) what Matthews could potentially accomplish, you by definition, want more people to be informed about it.

It's in the Poll section because it's a poll that belongs in the poll section. I don't really care about the question, and I think this poll is fairly redundant. What I want is for people to stop derailing the thread and endlessly complaining about other people not catering to their every whim because they refuse to open google.

Offering more information makes people more receptive to actually research the in depth details themselves.

There's nothing to research. If you don't know who he is, either move on, or do this exhausting extensive list of things:

1. Open google.
2. Type "Vaive".

There, you're done.

Wouldnt you want to inform people about your franchise history? Rather than be obtuse and condescending?

Literally this whole thread is people being obtuse and condescending towards the OP and Leaf fans, because everything wasn't handed to them, and supposedly the record means nothing because it's "only" 55 goals. Including the person I was originally responding to before you pushed yourself into the conversation. Move. On.

 

[North Cole]

No. There doesn't.

Maybe not to you, but he's very well known.

It's in the Poll section because it's a poll that belongs in the poll section. I don't really care about the question, and I think this poll is fairly redundant. What I want is for people to stop derailing the thread and endlessly complaining about other people not catering to their every whim because they refuse to open google.

There's nothing to research. If you don't know who he is, either move on, or do this exhausting extensive list of things:

1. Open google.
2. Type "Vaive".

There, you're done.

Literally this whole thread is people being obtuse and condescending towards the OP and Leaf fans, because everything wasn't handed to them, and supposedly the record means nothing because it's "only" 55 goals. Including the person I was originally responding to before you pushed yourself into the conversation. Move. On.

Well known in Toronto maybe. As evidenced by this very thread, 31% of voters picked the option saying they don't know who he is. So unless you've personally polled more than 145 people outside of Leaf fandom or you're going to fall back on the excuse that, most people voting that option are Leaf haters and trolls - you're just speaking in generalities that no one can dispute.

Yep another generality and hyperbole - "Literally" the whole thread is people being condescending to Leaf fans... A quick scan of posts by people who don't appear to be Leafs fans, on the first two pages proves this claim wrong:
"What’s the record, leaf record? American record? What"
"Voted option 2. Could be option 1 tho"
"I'm going to assume these were sarcasm, right?"
"How many does he need to tie Andreychuk? I voted no."

I made a condescending post about it to poke fun at this exact attitude. If you don't care about the poll question why are you in here bedraggling people who also don't care? I'd figure you want more people to know about Leaf history, but I guess the history is just redundant, right? I googled him, and read a few posts down and someone said Leafs record, but you're a hypocrite for telling people to do an easy Google search, when the OP just had to change his sentence to this:
"So he's basically easilly on pace to break The Leaf franchise record for goals by Rick Vaive's right now."

In your mind, everyone is required to follow two simple steps, but the OP doesn't have to take four seconds to add seven words to his post? Sure, I'll move on - I voted that Matthews would break the record, so I did my part. Why don't you also move on, and get off your high horse while you're at it.

 

[Rogue Leader]

No chance. Stop putting unrealistic expectations on the boy! Play a complete 200-f game and win games - the rest doesn't matter.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Well known in Toronto maybe.

Well known by hockey fans that aren't 5 years old and those who have access to google.

I made a condescending post

Yes, you did. Quite hypocritical.

I'd figure you want more people to know about Leaf history, but I guess the history is just redundant, right?

The history is not redundant. The poll is. This is essentially a poll asking if Matthews will hit 55 goals, and we have countless threads about what goal numbers Matthews may hit. That said, this poll has every right to exist, and the OP has every right to post it how he wants. If you don't like how the OP did it, or you don't understand the question, then move on, look it up, look a few posts down in the thread, or make your own poll. That's way simpler than endlessly complaining because everything wasn't 100% perfect and how you wanted it.

Why don't you also move on

I was, until you rudely inserted yourself into a conversation that you were not a part of.

 

[Karl Eriksson]

Main boards thread about a middling historical leaf with zero context in the opening post. Those are the sportscenter ‘keys to success’.

 

[psycat]

I don't really consider it a "record" and I don't think Matthews will get past that number this year, or ever, should come somewhat close though.