View Single Post
09-10-2012, 04:21 PM
Registered User
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 46,047
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by seventieslord
While it is probably impossible to spin Billy Gilmour in any way other than he is the weakest offensive player in either team’s top 9 (although I would love to see them attempt it), his score of 89, if taken literally, would mean that the player holding the next-lowest score (Jordan Staal) is about 2.6 times as likely to generate offense. That is simply not realistic. Gilmour’s score breaks the mold somewhat.
Well, for one, you only list 3 seasons for Gilmour, when his career lasted 8 years.

For another, "points" from that era heavily favored goal scorers and Gilmour was a much better playmaker than goal scorer. In the two seasons for which SIHR reconstructed assists from newspaper accounts (1907-08 and 1908-09), Gilmour has 80% and 75% of #2 in assists, while only scoring 19% and 30% in goals. This backs up the general perception of those who saw him play that Gilmour was one of the true stars of the era, despite his shoddy goal totals

Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 09-10-2012 at 04:29 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote