HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Is Joe Malone's 1917-1918 44G in 20 GP the best goal scoring season ever?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-21-2013, 02:32 PM
  #1
drs151
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,325
vCash: 500
Is Joe Malone's 1917-1918 44G in 20 GP the best goal scoring season ever?

I'm not claiming to be an expert on the history of the game because I'm not but whenever I see people bashing Gretzky because he was in a higher goal scoring era people usually find many other points and arguments to prove he is the best.

So my first question is why isn't joe Malone's 44 goals in 20 games not considered the best ever. I'm suspecting some very smart hf posters will explain to me why joes isn't considered the greatest because of early evolution of the game or something along the lines of that.

So my last question is if joes isn't considered the greatest, then wouldn't that mean that it's very possible gretzky's records or at least some of them or perhaps his legacy as the greatest ever could be disregarded 50-100 years from now because it was so long ago?

drs151 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 02:47 PM
  #2
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,688
vCash: 500
Joe Malone's 1917-18 is one of the most overrated season of all-time.

He scored 44 goals in 20 games. 2nd place Cy Denneny scored 36 goals in 20 games. Malone beat 2nd place by 22%

Look at Alex Ovechkin's 2007-08. He scored 65 goals. 2nd place Kovalchuk scored 52 goals. Ovechkin beat 2nd place by 25%.

And that's before you consider that in 1917-18, a lot of the talent pool (half?) was playing out west in the PCHA, not the NHL.

Players had such high goal per game totals in 1917-18 largely because starters played the full 60 minutes.

Don't get me wrong, Malone's 1917-18 was an all-time great goal scoring season, but there have been multiple seasons that were better (including Ovechkin's 2007-08 most recently).


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 10-21-2013 at 04:54 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 02:47 PM
  #3
LEAFANFORLIFE23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drs151 View Post
I'm not claiming to be an expert on the history of the game because I'm not but whenever I see people bashing Gretzky because he was in a higher goal scoring era people usually find many other points and arguments to prove he is the best.

So my first question is why isn't joe Malone's 44 goals in 20 games not considered the best ever. I'm suspecting some very smart hf posters will explain to me why joes isn't considered the greatest because of early evolution of the game or something along the lines of that.

So my last question is if joes isn't considered the greatest, then wouldn't that mean that it's very possible gretzky's records or at least some of them or perhaps his legacy as the greatest ever could be disregarded 50-100 years from now because it was so long ago?


No because he's so far ahead of eveyone else that there is simply no room for debate and never will be. Not 50 not 100, not 1000 years from now

LEAFANFORLIFE23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 04:39 PM
  #4
ted1971
History Of Hockey
 
ted1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: south jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,008
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drs151 View Post
I'm not claiming to be an expert on the history of the game because I'm not but whenever I see people bashing Gretzky because he was in a higher goal scoring era people usually find many other points and arguments to prove he is the best.

So my first question is why isn't joe Malone's 44 goals in 20 games not considered the best ever. I'm suspecting some very smart hf posters will explain to me why joes isn't considered the greatest because of early evolution of the game or something along the lines of that.

So my last question is if joes isn't considered the greatest, then wouldn't that mean that it's very possible gretzky's records or at least some of them or perhaps his legacy as the greatest ever could be disregarded 50-100 years from now because it was so long ago?
Are You simply going by his GGP?

ted1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 05:47 PM
  #5
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFANFORLIFE23 View Post
No because he's so far ahead of eveyone else that there is simply no room for debate and never will be. Not 50 not 100, not 1000 years from now
That's debatable.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 01:51 PM
  #6
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
I'll go with Gretzky's 87 in 74 games in 83-84, the highest gpg of his career. He beat 2nd place by 31 goals or 55%.

HM to his 92 goal season and the Rocket's 46-47 season where he beat the field by 50% with 45 in 60.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:10 AM
  #7
Brewsky
King Of The Ice Mugs
 
Brewsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: King County
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,331
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Brewsky Send a message via AIM to Brewsky Send a message via MSN to Brewsky Send a message via Yahoo to Brewsky Send a message via Skype™ to Brewsky
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
I'll go with Gretzky's 87 in 74 games in 83-84, the highest gpg of his career. He beat 2nd place by 31 goals or 55%.

HM to his 92 goal season and the Rocket's 46-47 season where he beat the field by 50% with 45 in 60.
Damn, looking at those stats it's like wow!

Brewsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 10:00 AM
  #8
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,049
vCash: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
I'll go with Gretzky's 87 in 74 games in 83-84, the highest gpg of his career. He beat 2nd place by 31 goals or 55%.

HM to his 92 goal season and the Rocket's 46-47 season where he beat the field by 50% with 45 in 60.
Yeah, how much you beat the field with is certainly relevant during that particular season, but hardly when claiming it's what matters when comparing between different ones.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 11:04 AM
  #9
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yeah, how much you beat the field with is certainly relevant during that particular season, but hardly when claiming it's what matters when comparing between different ones.
Raw difference does not matter but difference as a percentage can be a useful tool for comparison. As with anything there r always other factors that should be looked at

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 01:19 PM
  #10
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,049
vCash: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Raw difference does not matter but difference as a percentage can be a useful tool for comparison. As with anything there r always other factors that should be looked at
I dont think so. The risk is too big for the second best scorer to sometimes be an outlier as well, in his own right. That does not happen all seasons though, and that's the problem with counting percentage differentials. 1990/91 and 1992/93 are two seasons each an extreme when it comes to this. The first one 86(Hull) and 51(Three players if i dont remember wrong), and during the second 76 for both Selanne and Mogilny.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 01:25 PM
  #11
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
I dont think so. The risk is too big for the second best scorer to sometimes be an outlier as well, in his own right. That does not happen all seasons though, and that's the problem with counting percentage differentials. 1990/91 and 1992/93 are two seasons each an extreme when it comes to this. The first one 86(Hull) and 51(Three players if i dont remember wrong), and during the second 76 for both Selanne and Mogilny.
I see the point now, % over second place depend largely on the quality of second place. I think that season-to-season point totals are semi-constant, but goal totals are not at all.

% of 5th place or % of 10th place are probably better standard for modern times, though they don't work at all in a year with a thinner talent pool like 1918

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 01:44 PM
  #12
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I see the point now, % over second place depend largely on the quality of second place. I think that season-to-season point totals are semi-constant, but goal totals are not at all.

% of 5th place or % of 10th place are probably better standard for modern times, though they don't work at all in a year with a thinner talent pool like 1918
I'll agree with this. I hadn't realized how much more reliable this method is for points than goals

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 02:36 PM
  #13
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,678
vCash: 500
No it isn't. Now, I am the last person in the world to say that certain eras have less relevance in the grand scheme of things. In fact I argue with people about that. However, 1918 was almost 100 years ago. You can compare 1918 to today in Baseball a lot better than hockey for the reason that it was a new game, a new league and the kinks were still being worked out. I don't often say "Well it was a different game back then" because most often it has always been the same concept. However, this was before forward passing came into effect and it is hard to put Malone's 1918 season ahead of anything Gretzky or Lemieux did.

So my answer is no.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 11:33 PM
  #14
Bure All Day
Registered User
 
Bure All Day's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver Isl.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,811
vCash: 500
I'd say no because scoring at high pace for only 20 games isn't that hard...

For example, i remember Kovy a few years ago scoring at 80g pace through 20 games

Example #2 I remember Shanahan on the Rangers scoring like 22 goals in his first 24-25 games, something absurd like that, ended up finishing with around 30

Bure All Day is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 11:38 PM
  #15
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Joe Malone's 1917-18 is one of the most overrated season of all-time.

He scored 44 goals in 20 games. 2nd place Cy Denneny scored 36 goals in 20 games. Malone beat 2nd place by 22%

Look at Alex Ovechkin's 2007-08. He scored 65 goals. 2nd place Kovalchuk scored 52 goals. Ovechkin beat 2nd place by 25%.

And that's before you consider that in 1917-18, a lot of the talent pool (half?) was playing out west in the PCHA, not the NHL.

Players had such high goal per game totals in 1917-18 largely because starters played the full 60 minutes.

Don't get me wrong, Malone's 1917-18 was an all-time great goal scoring season, but there have been multiple seasons that were better (including Ovechkin's 2007-08 most recently).
Over half a million Canadians of military age were also sitting in trenches over in Europe.

Is there any evidence this had any impact on the hockey leagues of the day? I've always seen reference to WWII, but never WWI.

Edit: That's less than 10% of the population...not sure what percentage of the age demographic is involved. WWII was also less than 10%, but my lazy mental math indicates it was probably closer.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.

Last edited by Beef Invictus: 10-23-2013 at 11:48 PM.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 11:52 PM
  #16
Bure All Day
Registered User
 
Bure All Day's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver Isl.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Over half a million Canadians of military age were also sitting in trenches over in Europe.

Is there any evidence this had any impact on the hockey leagues of the day? I've always seen reference to WWII, but never WWI.

Edit: That's less than 10% of the population...not sure what percentage of the age demographic is involved. WWII was also less than 10%, but my lazy mental math indicates it was probably closer.
It did, many hockey stars went to war

Bure All Day is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 11:59 PM
  #17
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Over half a million Canadians of military age were also sitting in trenches over in Europe.

Is there any evidence this had any impact on the hockey leagues of the day? I've always seen reference to WWII, but never WWI.

Edit: That's less than 10% of the population...not sure what percentage of the age demographic is involved. WWII was also less than 10%, but my lazy mental math indicates it was probably closer.
It absolutely made a difference, especially since one of those players was Frank Nighbor, and Joe Malone absolutely torched Ottawa in Nighbor's absence:

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr
In the 1917-1918 season, Frank Nighbor played only 10 of 22 games, in large part because Nighbor served in the Royal Air Force during part of World War 1. Ottawa and Toronto were working on a deal to transfer Nighbor to Toronto. I have not found any information that injury was a factor.
Nighbor played only 2 of the 1st 13 games.

Nighbor's extended absence in '18 gives us an idea of his importance to his team.

Discounting the Montreal Wanderers, who folded early in the season (only played 6 games), The '18 Ottawa Senators had the worst GA and the worst GF in the NHL, and missed the playoffs.

Ottawa without Nighbor in '18
3-9 record
59 GF, 73 GA

Ottawa with Nighbor in '18
5-5 record
43 GF, 40 GA

Lalonde's goals vs Ottawa with Nighbor: 1 game, 1g
Lalonde's goals vs Ottawa without Nighbor: 5 games, 8g

Malone's goals vs Ottawa with Nighbor: 3 games, 1g
Malone's goals vs Ottawa without Nighbor: 7 games, 23g

Malone's '18 season has become legendary. He scored 44g in 22 games, the highest goals per game pace in NHL history. But even more amazing is that he scored over half of those goals in 7 games against Ottawa when Nighbor was out of the lineup.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...5&postcount=22

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2013, 12:26 AM
  #18
MadLuke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
Over half a million Canadians of military age were also sitting in trenches over in Europe.

Is there any evidence this had any impact on the hockey leagues of the day? I've always seen reference to WWII, but never WWI.

Edit: That's less than 10% of the population...not sure what percentage of the age demographic is involved. WWII was also less than 10%, but my lazy mental math indicates it was probably closer.
It is probably have a big impact, probably than a big big percentage of that half a million canadians were men in the age to play pro hockey (and good shape). (so a much more bigger percentage of the potential hockey player pool than the general population pool, at least 3-4 times).

MadLuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2013, 05:06 AM
  #19
brec7
Registered User
 
brec7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney, NS
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
I'll go with Gretzky's 87 in 74 games in 83-84, the highest gpg of his career. He beat 2nd place by 31 goals or 55%.
How about Brett Hull's 86 goal season which I believe contained ZERO empty netters, quite impressive.

brec7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2013, 07:05 AM
  #20
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brec7 View Post
How about Brett Hull's 86 goal season which I believe contained ZERO empty netters, quite impressive.
Should have put it as a HM. Same with Mario, Bobby Hull and Espo.

The thing with Gretzky and Mario as well, they put up great goal totals while also being great playmakers. If they had just concentrated more on goals like the hulls, Richards and bossys, one wonders how many they could have scored during their big years.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-25-2013, 06:35 PM
  #21
Bure All Day
Registered User
 
Bure All Day's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver Isl.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
Should have put it as a HM. Same with Mario, Bobby Hull and Espo.

The thing with Gretzky and Mario as well, they put up great goal totals while also being great playmakers. If they had just concentrated more on goals like the hulls, Richards and bossys, one wonders how many they could have scored during their big years.
considering Gretzky had 50 in 39 games (scored 5 goals in 39th game) you can assume he could've scored 100+, which would literally be unbeatable, if 92 isn't already

Bure All Day is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2014, 08:10 PM
  #22
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drs151 View Post
So my first question is why isn't joe Malone's 44 goals in 20 games not considered the best ever.
This has been touched on already, but the circumstances of the game were quite different at the time, making direct goals-per-game comparisons useless.

But if you want a truly dominant historical goal-scoring performance, check out Russell Bowie's 1900/01 season. He scored 24 goals that season. The next-best players scored 10 each. Bowie scored more goals in seven games that season than the entire Quebec Hockey Club did in eight games. On a per-game basis, he almost outscored the Montreal AAA team as well. And it wasn't a weak league either, besides Bowie there were 10 other Hall-of-Famers playing regularly between the five teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drs151 View Post
So my last question is if joes isn't considered the greatest, then wouldn't that mean that it's very possible gretzky's records or at least some of them or perhaps his legacy as the greatest ever could be disregarded 50-100 years from now because it was so long ago?
This is a very interesting point you raise here, because you often see people writing off old-tyme players because they played so long ago, and the game was different, and the game that person grew up watching is obviously the way the game is *supposed* to be played. As opposed to the reality of the situation, which if history tells us anything, is that the current version of the game is just a point along the sport's evolution, and it too will pass into history at some point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure All Day View Post
I'd say no because scoring at high pace for only 20 games isn't that hard...
This fails to consider that 20 games of 60 minutes ice time is equivalent to 60 games of 20 minutes ice time. Malone may only have 20 "games played" in his stats, but he played over 50 minutes per game, so that was much more hockey than you associate with a modern player's 20 games.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2014, 09:35 PM
  #23
Highstyx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 304
vCash: 500
Imagne Gretzky was born in 1898. He is on a line with Babe Dye . Joe Malone is his other winger.. Malone wasn't a passer anyways. Gretz with 60g in 20 gp, Malone with 49, Dye with 40. Gretzky was the greatest ever.

Have fun w that

Highstyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2014, 09:39 PM
  #24
Highstyx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drs151 View Post
I'm not claiming to be an expert on the history of the game because I'm not but whenever I see people bashing Gretzky because he was in a higher goal scoring era people usually find many other points and arguments to prove he is the best.

So my first question is why isn't joe Malone's 44 goals in 20 games not considered the best ever. I'm suspecting some very smart hf posters will explain to me why joes isn't considered the greatest because of early evolution of the game or something along the lines of that.

So my last question is if joes isn't considered the greatest, then wouldn't that mean that it's very possible gretzky's records or at least some of them or perhaps his legacy as the greatest ever could be disregarded 50-100 years from now because it was so long ago?
LOL Gretz would score over 100 today. No clutching and grabbing. No C line. Put him with a 26 yr old Bossy and Lucic to ride shotgun.. lookout

Highstyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-09-2014, 09:52 PM
  #25
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Doof Warrior
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 48,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Joe Malone's 1917-18 is one of the most overrated season of all-time.

He scored 44 goals in 20 games. 2nd place Cy Denneny scored 36 goals in 20 games. Malone beat 2nd place by 22%

Look at Alex Ovechkin's 2007-08. He scored 65 goals. 2nd place Kovalchuk scored 52 goals. Ovechkin beat 2nd place by 25%.

And that's before you consider that in 1917-18, a lot of the talent pool (half?) was playing out west in the PCHA, not the NHL.

Players had such high goal per game totals in 1917-18 largely because starters played the full 60 minutes.

Don't get me wrong, Malone's 1917-18 was an all-time great goal scoring season, but there have been multiple seasons that were better (including Ovechkin's 2007-08 most recently).
Add to that the number of players sitting in trenches to boot.

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:37 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.