View Single Post
07-31-2014, 03:08 PM
Registered User
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
For two seasons (51-52 and 52-53) to be exact, other than that Jágr is on par with Howe according to the numbers above.

There is no way to determine the size of the actual talent pool unfortunately, so yeah, it's a very rough estimation with elements of uncertainty.

But it also means it's less likely you get a player of Joe Sakic calibre who diminishes the scoring dominance of the top scorer over his peers.

If I'm arguing Jágr is better than we thought and let's say a 9 out of 10 offensively instead of a 8/10 then it doesn't mean Howe was actually worse and not a 9/10 but a 8/10 all of a sudden. He's still a 9/10 and yet he might not be better than Jágr (offensively) like we assumed before.

I wouldn't hold it against Gordie Howe either if he was outscored by Mario Lemieux (or Wayne Gretzky) had his prime fallen into the 80s or 90s, so I think it's fair to remove Lemieux.

That's probably because no other player in the half-century before expansion was that close to be as good offensively as Howe was at his best, but what does that tell us about post-expansion players relative to Howe? Does it tell us that Jágr would have been less dominant than Howe in the 1950s scoring-wise?

The argument on my part is not that Howe doesn't belong in the same tier as Jágr (still talking offence only, otherwise Jágr would in fact not belong in the same tier as Howe). What I'm suggesting is that Jágr might not belong in a tier below Howe but in the same tier. Well, Howe's 52-53 season is something else, but other than that it doesn't strike me as unreasonable to assume both players would end up with very similar scoring finishes if both played and peaked during the same era.
So if you remove all those players to equalize competition*, Jagr looks to be on Howe's level of dominance ... if you ignore Howe's best season.

What do the numbers look like if you ignore the single best seasons from each player? (Rhetorical question obviously, as you posted their seasonal numbers above)


*and many people think the late 90s-early 00s was something of a dark age in high-end Canadian talent

Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 07-31-2014 at 03:24 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote