Jaromir Jagr has been mentionned a few times in some of these threads. What I see is the mention of his 127 points in 1998-99 and how he led the league in scoring by a margin of 20 points over Selanne who had Karyia on his team finishing 3rd.
That was a great season considering the circumstances of it being dead in the middle of the "Dead Puck" era and the fact that Jagr almost outscored the second leading scorer of the Penguins by almost 50 points.
Most have forgot to mention or just forgot altogether that that wasn't even his best season.
His best season was back in 1995-96 when he scored 149 points, 62 goals and 87 assists. The points and the assists being records for wingers. Some will say that it was because of Lemieux and his effect on Jagr. Well some of it is partly due to Super Mario but I remember that season a lot of people and players alike all felt Jagr was the clear number 2 player of the NHL. Actually what is forgotten is that Jagr played with Lemieux mostly on the powerplay but his regular linemate was Petr Nedved.
Eventhough that season Lemieux outscored Jagr by 11 points despite missing a dozen games or so, it remains that Jagr was second in scoring that year and finished 29 points ahead of Sakic who was third in scoring. Sakic himself had some pretty good help as Forsberg finished 4th in scoring with 118 points not too far behind.
1995-96 was a highscoring season and the last real high soring season that the NHL has seen but it does not compare to the scoring of the 1980's, so really it is plausible to say that Jagr's 149 points in 1996 (regardless if it was aided by Lemieux' production or not) could equal Yzerman's 155 points and even surpass it.
My question is why does Jagr's 149 points in 1996 get overlooked in terms of greatness and yet some do make an argument for his 127 points in 1998-99?
As we discussed earlier. There are a few exceptions to the rule when it comes to teammate scoring. The exceptions are named Lemieux, Gretzky and Orr. 3 guys who proved they could score with anyone and elevate anyone in the league. Even though I address that I believe teammates play a minimal role in other superstar players personal statistics, these 3 players often are the glaring omission to the rule.
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=20354795&postcount=3
(This post covered it almost completely)
His 1995-96 year was not as impressive as 98-99 chiefly for 2 reasons.
#1, 95-96 was the last of the high scoring years before the entire NHL decided to powertrap into the dead puck era, complete with no call clutch and grabbing. In 95-96, their was a large crackdown on obstruction and a large rise in penalties(Their last ditch effort before giving up to the Clutch/Grab era), which lead to far more powerplays. Among the largest ever until 05-06. Pittsburgh was the best PP team in the league that year by an exceptionally large margin, and the fact that there was such an unnatural amount of powerplays certainly played into the scoring that year. Especially given that he was centered by one of the greatest PP players of all time. One of the few players I will say could boost anyone's stats.
The effects were obvious. There were twelve 100+ point scorers, eight 50 goal scorers, and thirty five players had over 80 points. You say this year was nowhere near as high scoring as the 80's, yet more players had 100+ points in this season than nearly every year in the 80's.
After the 96 finals, when a weak, starless Florida team copied the previous years Winner, the Devils, and their trapping system, and subsequently took a weak starless team to the finals, every team started trapping.
In 98-99, there was no obstruction crackdown leading to an obscure amount of Powerplays, just about every team in the league had fallen to trapping, and the effects on player scoring was devastating.
Not a single 50 goal scorer in the league, and only three 100+ point scorers. Only thirteen players had over 80 points.
Great players will always put up good numbers despite who they're playing with. However, if they are given the opportunity to play with other players that are also offensively-gifted, then they will find the most success at these times (taking into consideration their age, team needs and coaching strategy).
Almost all the examples you give yourself supports this claim. Of course the Edmonton system had an affect on Gretzky's totals but his best years, where he broke all the records and won all his cups were in Edmonton. It's hard to just dismiss that.
It also happened in the peak of his career, and his numbers in the finals 2 Edmonton years are barely different than his first LA year. I already showed that.
Marcel Dionne was quite consistent during his career, at least in the regular season anyway, so it can be argued that whether he had talent around him or not he put up points. But his best season statistically was with Simmer, probably the best linemate he had in his career. This supports the claim that playing with talent helps increase personal totals.
Dionne improved and went to a team built around him. Obviously his numbers improved too. Linemates? I do not feel they had much to do with it. He was scoring 121-122 points multiple times with nobodies on a team with no visible reliable system. The fact that he scored 130, 135 and 137 once a system was in place around him, is not even a drastic increase. 8-15 points, and most of it can be attributed to that, not linemates. Back to the 5-10 points
By far and away Kurri's best seasons came playing with Wayne Gretzky and playing on the Edmonton Oilers. Kurri's lowest single-season point totals in Edmonton were 75 points in his rookie year and 86 in his sophmore year. After he went went to LA, he would never score more than 87 points or 31 goals in a season again in his career.
This has been gone over. Multiple times. Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr were freaks of Nature who could elevate even the best players numbers.
But in general, superstars scored better when they were the go to guys on their team.
Yzerman, for example, declined once Fedorov arrived.
Jagr's best season, statistically anyway, came playing with Lemiuex.
Only because it came in a year in which Penalties were being called left, right and center, and before the dead puck era. 1998-99 was a better year. I went over this above.
Hawerchuck was 27 when he went to Buffalo, and had already showed signs of decline before leaving, dropping his season point totals two consecutive years and by 40 points in that span.
His personal statistics were not declining at all because of his age. In 1988-89, He was having a terrific offensive season until he broke a few bones in his face in February. He slowed down as a result. He also had a very bad year on the two way side of the game. When Murdoch took over as coach the next year, Hawerchuk was asked to pay more attention in his own end, and he overcompensated. His goals against dropped from 123 to 91, but his goals for also dropped. When he got to Buffalo, he was back to playing his normal game. The biggest difference was icetime being split with other superstars. He still had it offensively.
Bossy still had his best year playing with Trottier. What the 84-85 season proves was that Bossy was a great player. What the 81-82 season proves is that Bossy was at his best when he had strong offensive minded players like Trottier and Potvin. Recchi's already been talked about.
Simplistic view like this do not take into account factors like health, or any other key grooves Bossy just happened to be in the year he had his monster year, which was 2 years removed from the year in question.
The fact of the matter is, Bossy was playing with Trottier in 82-83 when he scored 118 points, Playing with Trottier in 83-84 when He scored 118 points, and 117 points the next year without Bossy, but with 40-60 point man Sutter. Guys like Sutter are chiefly the kind of people who benefit statistically from icetime with superstars, but Bossy was the type who could do it with anyone.
Lemiuex's best overall season I think was his 160 in 60 but his best full season he had nobody linemates scoring 199 points. He did have Coffey with him but Lemiuex's injuries really limited what we could have seen from him. Had he played a full career, I don't think 88-89 would have been his best season.
We can agree on that point.
Oates is probably the exception to this rule though. For the most part, when he had guys like Hull, Neely and Borque, he put up some of his best totals. But his absolute best season came playing with guys you wouldn't have expected to help him get to 142 points. But from what I can tell, Oates is the exception. For every Adam Oates, there is a Brett Hull, a Jari Kurri, a Jarmior Jagr and a Mike Bossy.
Hull ill buy. he was much better if paired with a good set up man. That was his style and his game. Kurri? Kurri showed no visible decline immediately removed from Gretzky to Messier(A guy who averaged 100 less points. If linemates mattered to the degree you said, then Kurri should have had a visible decline with Messier and Carson as opposed to Gretzky)
Jagr scored 102 point with HHOF playmaker Francis as his center the year before he exploded into 127 points with 2nd liners Straka and kip Hrdina. He was thrown into a role where he was needed to be the go to guy offensively with little help, and he exploded. Francis by contrast went to Carolina where they asked him to play a reduced 2nd line role with limited PP time, and his statistics dropped. Until the next year, when he once again was given that icetime and his statistic rebounded, despite his advancing age.
Bossy, as already discussed, could do it with anybody.
How many guys have there actually been whose best seasons came during their peak playing with grossly inferior linemates and teammates? I don't think there have been many, and that is why I rank Yzerman's 88-89 season so high.
Have we not been discussing that?
For what its worth, since the Society for international Hockey research is discussing this, maybe you missed this quote.
For what it's worth.
I attended a SIHR meeting with Jimmy Devellano as the guest speaker last night.
He told the assembled members that he doesn't put much stock in Yzerman's big point year's. He used the term inflated. He stated that the main goal of the team then was selling tickets and that Yzerman was encouraged to put up big numbers to garner attention and to not worry about backchecking.
In time that changed, but according to Devellano, Yzerman did not become a complete player until Bowman arrived, and that even then it was a tough, and somewhat acrimonius process.
Seems other credible witnesses who watched Hockey during that period have similar opinions to my own.
).
