View Single Post
Old
04-29-2012, 12:28 AM
  #61
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velociraptor View Post
Mogilny was never that good in the post-season, perhaps I'm a little biased towards Leach, but I really don't see him that far off from Mogilny.
Let's pretend that Leach didn't play with Clarke and in a higher scoring era and just look at raw point totals in his best seasons: 91, 78, 76, 70. These are actually the only seasons in which he had more than 54 points. Mogilny's best seasons: 127, 107, 84, 83, 79, 79, 73, plus a 64 and 57 in injury-shortened years, and 47 in 1995 which is 82 in a full season.

Put another way: Leach averaged better than 0.72 PPG in a season 4 times: 1.14, 1.00, 0.98, 0.89. Mogilny was over a point per game 8 times, and over 0.72 another 7 times.

Onto adjusted: I realize adjusted numbers might be too nice to players from Mogilny's era, but this is pretty telling. Mogilny has 1054 adjusted points in 990 games; Leach has 572 in 934. Mogilny has nearly twice as many, in not many more games. It's actually 74% more per game.

As for the playoffs, Leach did have that one awesome year, and Mogilny doesn't really have that defining season, but he actually has the edge in career-long production. I would definitely prefer a guy who got 0.69 PPG over 124 games from 1990-2004, over a guy who had 0.73 over 93 games from 1971-1981.

It's up to the individual voter how much it matters that Leach's 0.73 represents a 3% increase from his regular season production, and Mogilny drops 34% in the playoffs. To me, it basically means that the gap is slightly lessened in the playoffs. Instead of scoring an adjusted 74% more in the regular season, Mogilny only scores an adjusted 10% more or so. That doesn't mean I think the difference is just 10% now. We shouldn't be entirely forgetting regular season play; it still constitutes 90% of the career games for each player. But we should weigh it less. So the difference in potential production should be between 10% and 74%, but much closer to 74%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velociraptor View Post
Yes, but we are in the playoffs aren't we? I think it's a serious point of interest that some players were known to ignite their game in the playoffs, that simply weren't that good in the regular season.
Yes, Fedorov is getting a rough ride from the "rankings" crowd since he had ten seasons with 62-87 points that don't make that "top-10" cutoff that is so important to some people. I think he is a pretty solid 2nd line scorer in the ATD, not great, but passable. Ron Francis territory. But he should be seen as a player who gets better in the postseason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez
I meant a better scoring winger in the sense of a better winger for a scoring line, not just as a goal scorer. I definitely could have made that clearer.
I know the point production part of it is a no-brainer, but it's not as far off in goals as you may think.

Leach's best adjusted goals seasons: 53 42 39 28 28 26 21 21 21
Demitra's: 42 41 40 31 27 26 25 25 22

that actually adds up to the same number over their best 9 years.

assists, of course, is a different story. Demitra has over twice as many adjusted assists in fewer games. Demitra held up better over time, too, with 13 more adjusted goals in 100 fewer games. You are absolutely right that he's the better player; Leach's only edges are one-season regular season and playoff goalscoring peaks that are far superior, and they happened in the same season.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote