NHL All-Time Goals Leaders - Stats Hockey
Here is an idea I am going to run up the flag pole; is Marcel Dionne a greater goal scorer than Gretzky? The stats show that Gretz scored 163 more goals than Dionne, but Gretz played a lot more games, and a lot more playoff games (I don't have the stats here, but when I did them in the past, Gretzky edged Dionne on a per game average). But think about the teams; Wayne played wity Kurri, Coffey, Messier, McTavish (O.K., the last one was a joke). Dionne played with...a couple of guys I can't remember as they never made it to the playoffs.
Wait, I just found some stats for Dionne; go to http://www.hockeysandwich.com/mdionne.html - now look at the goals scored - very impressive. Now look at the team involved. He only played for crappy teams. How he managed to get that many assists is a mystery.
I am not trying to poke a hole in the holy balloon that is Gretzky, but is there room for a baseball-like examination of the stats? Is there room to say that to score as much as Marcel did, while missing the playoffs nearly every year in LA, that he was the better pure goal scorer?
Now, for the comedy comeback to my own post, here are some stats for the Kings, post Dionne:
Team Records
Most Goals, Single Season
Bernie Nicholls, 1988-89: 70
Most Assists, Single Season
Wayne Gretzky, 1990-91: 122
Most Points, Single Season
Wayne Gretzky, 1988-89: 168
As much as it pains me to stick up for Wayne Gretzky, here goes. If you want to talk about productivity and greatness, then you need to look at Gretzky before the trade to LA and especially before the Suter hit from behind that weakened wayne. I think that the 214 point season with 90 some goals is hard to overlook if you want to talk about the best pure goal scorer ever. How about 50 goals in 35 games? How about the fact that the league changed the coincidental minor rule to keep gretzky from having 4 on 4 ice? How about the lack of empty net goals that are part of Gretzky's stats? How about the attention that Gretzky had night in and night out from top teams gunning for him? Dionne was on a lame team and probably played teams taking a breather in terms of effort level (e.g. he may have seen a lot more #2 goaltenders than Gretzky ever did).
ReplyDeleteIt is also getting to be a tired routine seeing the "revisionist history" of the oilers. The idea that Gretzky was great because of the players around him was not the case at all. If you read Peter Gzowki's THE GAME OF OUR LIVES, in which he chronicles the year he spent travelling and living with the young Oilers, you will see that Gretzky was thought to have been the catalyst that allowed all of the other guys to develop. Wayne took the heat off of them publicly and on the ice. Gretzky drew all the serious defence talent against his line.
If you want to look at someone who comes even close to gretzky, then talk about Lemieux who managed unbelievable goals with a back that would have left most humans crippled. He is also a player that made everyone around him look better. If you need concrete examples, Kevin Stevens, Jaromir Jagr, Tom Barrasso, Joey Mullen... In fact, name any penguin and they will fit the argument.
Dionne had a nice career, but there must be a reason the Habs, the Nordiques or any other team never made a serious attempt to pick him up through a trade. It is also worth noting who the Habs drafted over Dionne; Guy Lafleur. If you were the general manager, would you make the same pick again, or would you take Dionne?
"I think that the 214 point season with 90 some goals is hard to overlook if you want to talk about the best pure goal scorer ever. How about 50 goals in 35 games?"
ReplyDeleteThese are good points, but when put in the context of a team game, the team that fed the puck to Gretzky was overwhelmingly more talented than any team Dionne ever played for.
"Dionne was on a lame team and probably played teams taking a breather in terms of effort level (e.g. he may have seen a lot more #2 goaltenders than Gretzky ever did)."
Interesting speculation. That may be true, but until I see the stats...
"It is also getting to be a tired routine seeing the "revisionist history" of the oilers."
To what are you referring? I am not offering any revision at all. Wayne played with Hall of Fame calibre guys. Dionne did not.
"The idea that Gretzky was great because of the players around him was not the case at all."
And nobody here is making that case. Gretzky was always a great scorer in whatever league he was in. But in Edmonton, during their Cup years, he played with great players. He played on a great team. He was the best of them to be sure, but they were a great team. The team helped Gretzky get to so many playoff games, which count in the scoring total. Dionne rarely played in the playoffs, yet finished third in goals and points. I know he has now been passed by Ron Francis, but that is the longevity factor.
"Dionne had a nice career, but there must be a reason the Habs, the Nordiques or any other team never made a serious attempt to pick him up through a trade."
Dionne had a great contract with L.A. and enjoyed living there with his family. He had no desire to play in Montreal after the death threats sent to his family during his years with the St. Catherines Black Hawks. The Quebec fans called him a traitor, and he responded with an "I'll show you" attitude.
Sam Pollock picked Lafleur because he was the star of the Remparts and the golden boy of Quebec hockey. Pollock traded two guys to L.A. in 71 to ensure that the Seals would come last and to ensure his first round pick. Pollock has asserted that to have not picked Lafleur would have been suicide.
Anyway, you make some good points and they are well worth considering.
One other point - in 1974-75, the Canadians were offered a Dionne for Dryden trade from Detroit, but the Habs did not go for it.
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting what-if.
While I concur that Dionne was a great player who has not received his due having played on weak teams in LA, there is also something about him that does not make one think of him in turns of greatness. To me, he is like a "super-sized" Sittler or Lanny MacDonad; they could get points but for not much effect. Or how about Tim Kerr who got tons of points just standing in a crease for his whole career. Then you have Phil Esposito who would rank himself above Dionne. Dino Cicarelli is a similar type of guy to Dionne, lots of points, but little else. For a player to be great, there has to be something different about them, they are able to transcend bad teams and make something happen. Dionne fails on that metric, whereas Jarome Iginla is getting credit for taking a team of pluggers pretty far last year.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing to consider is the average strength of talent that Dionne's and Gretzky's teams faced. In the old days, there were few cross-over games between east and west so Dionne was getting a lot of points against the Canucks who Sanucked they were so bad. The leafs were in the west, the red wings, chicago, all of whom stunk. He was not up against the Islanders, the Canadians, the Bruins or the other powerhouses of the East (by the way, Mike Bossy may also be a more impressive scorer than Dionne). In the 1980s, Calgary and Edmonton were the western reps in the Stanley up to 1990. Gretzky got most of his points against a powerful flames team (finalists 1986, champs 1989), improving Canucks (finalists with Roger Neilson as coach in the early 1980s), ever stronger teams in Detroit, Toronto and St Louis. Gretzky also got a ton of points against the Islanders and the Canadians and singlehandledly (besides the goaltending) carried that team to pretty high levels. Perhaps his real problem in LA was Kelly Hrudey but even still, he got LA into the stanley cup finals. Dionne never did that. Gretzky even made Bernie Nicholls look good.
If you want to figure out how much the hall of fame calibre guys helped Gretzky in Edmonton, take his average points in the three seasons prior to the trade and the three seasons after the trade. Figure out the percent reduction in average points associated with playing with the Kings instead of the oilers. Then reduce Gretzky's average points during his edmonton seasons by that percentage and see if Dionne is even in the same ballpark. It is a direct test. Hell, send me the stats and I will do the analysis and post it on this blog.
Don't you think that it is revealling that Habs would not deal Dryden for Dionne?
"For a player to be great, there has to be something different about them, they are able to transcend bad teams and make something happen. Dionne fails on that metric, whereas Jarome Iginla is getting credit for taking a team of pluggers pretty far last year."
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree. But, I am only making the point that over their careers, they were almost equal in goals per game (.6 for G, .54 for D). I don't think Dionne transformed LA and whether on not he made Simmer and Taylor better is something I don't know.
Incidentally, Lemieux has scored 679 in 879 games - often injured as you point out. Bossy went 573 in 752 games, almost equal to Lemieux. All these number are regular season game number. No playoffs factored in to even things out for Dionne.
Gretzky averaged 182 points in the three seasons prior to the trade, and 157 in L.A. The key to that was the reduction in assists as he went from an average of 131 to 112. Goals went from 45 to 41. These numbers are from www.hockeysandwich.com.
I think the Habs were smart to keep Dryden. They were deep at all positions except goal, and I don't think adding Dionne would have made a huge difference. I think it would have made a huge difference in Dionne's career though. He might have bloomed under the pressure, or he might have pulled a Doug Wickenheiser.
Also interesting to note (in the what if category) that Edmonton was bidding for Dionne in the year he went to LA. Edmonton had the second highest bid that year. The Canadians wanted him as well, but Jack Cooke just had too much money.
I spent a half hour preparing a post yesterday that got lost in cyberspace. It did not make it. I will not bother reconstructing it, but I will say that it was the definitive argument, and an emphatic killing blow to JimDandy's weak attempts to inflate the importance of a scorer in the 1970s NHL equivalent to the minor leagues, the western conference, home of the Kansas City Scouts, the Golden Seals, the Canucks, The Maple Leafs, the Dead Things, the Blues, the Hawks, heck even the Kings. Dionne did not have to play that often against Montreal, Boston, Philadelphia, the Islanders or even the lowly Rangers. Gretzky got his points in the 1980s when the western conference was ascendant in its importance. How many times did Gretzky have to play the Flames, which were probably the second best hockey team in the 1980s?
ReplyDeleteHonshui insists on being a clueless half-wit. The bulk of Dionne's career, and his greatest outupt, took place from 19475-1985. This was not the era of the Seals, Barons, or other weak franchises. The Kings regularly faced the Oilers, Flames and other emerging franchises. As well, being as there were on the west coast, the Kings faced longer and more grueling roadtrips than other teams.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you just debate and stop being such a pissy pants? Killing blow? That really is not even a little funny.
"19475-1985" What Calendar are you using? This could explain your clouded judgement.
ReplyDeleteLook, the bottom line is that while Dionne was a very good player, your attempt to make him the greatest of all time is absurd as making a similar argument for other good scorers who disappeared when it counted. I am thinking of Stephane Richer, and Pierre Turgeon.
Clouded judgement? Oh good christ.
ReplyDeleteThe initial point was "is Marcel Dionne a greater goal scorer than Gretzky?" Not, is he the greatest of all time.
Enjoy the phyrric victory.
Sorry, most of us were under the impression that better than gretzky would logically mean "best of all time". Find someone better than gretzky if you can.
ReplyDeleteAs for Baseball, Henry Aaron has declared Barry Bonds to be the greatest of all time, not Babe Ruth... at least according to the chattering color commentators in the 12 minute gaps between pitches... Aaron contends that the parks are less friendly to hitters, the pitching is better and so on... or wait, maybe that is why they said Clemons is the greatest pitcher of all time... Aw crap, its baseball. Who cares who is great. The only thing I know, is that Derek Jeter always seems to be winning because he pulls one out of the hat whenever his team needs it. I hate the Yankees by the way.