Greatest goal scorer of alltime: Pavel Bure

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

the lack of respect wayne gretzky gets on this board, and in the generation of fans who mainly post on this board is disgusting,....

no i'm not going to explain myself, if you actually watched hockey in the 80's you wouldn't need me to have to explain it to you.

I have to agree with you there. Just because he gets overemotional as a coach, doesn't mean he should be hated here on par with Pronger or Iginla. It really is puzzling.

[DenJ91 0]

yes i agree i left out bossy by accident. i could have added lemieux also, i just didn't have an hour to post, i was at work sorry. but i agree i should have included them. it's all opinion anyway.

and by the way, i already said "no disrespect to gretzky", however i'm sorry and i've seen this around the forum but it was indeed an era of s***ty goalies let's face it. even if wayne had today's stick technology, if he were up against goalies like broduer, loungo, etc all career, the games history would be much different, and i don't think there would be a "great one". is that a stretch? maybe but i've seen enough highlights of the old days and it makes me puke how horendous some goals were often scored. i'll admit i'm not big on wayne gretzky, i think his legacy should stick to his era. the game is just too different since the 90's

as far as i'm concerned most of today's goalies are too big, equip is too big and the nets should be bigger!! how's that for stirring the pot for discussion. nah don't, that's another topic all together. haha

and hey at least by starting the topic it's opening my mind somewhat and i'm questioning my thoughts on bure, although i still think he's top 3 for sure

Edited February 7, 2008 by DenJ91

[theman19 47]

yes i agree i left out bossy by accident. i could have added lemieux also, i just didn't have an hour to post, i was at work sorry. but i agree i should have included them. it's all opinion anyway.

and by the way, i already said "no disrespect to gretzky", however i'm sorry and i've seen this around the forum but it was indeed an era of s***ty goalies let's face it. even if wayne had today's stick technology, if he were up against goalies like broduer, loungo, etc all career, the games history would be much different, and i don't think there would be a "great one". is that a stretch? maybe but i've seen enough highlights of the old days and it makes me puke how horendous some goals were often scored. i'll admit i'm not big on wayne gretzky, i think his legacy should stick to his era. the game is just too different since the 90's

as far as i'm concerned most of today's goalies are too big, equip is too big and the nets should be bigger!! how's that for stirring the pot for discussion. nah don't, that's another topic all together. haha

and hey at least by starting the topic it's opening my mind somewhat and i'm questioning my thoughts on bure, although i still think he's top 3 for sure

Here's a question,...Why is it that "Gretzky's" era should be taken as a grain of salt, but mike bossy should obviously be crowned the king of goal scoring? Gretzy's era was from 80-92ish,.....does that toss out Mario? Bossy? Yzerman? Hull? Certianly not,..but they all faced the same freaking goalies at one point or another. Gretz still had to shoot on Roy, Smith (look it up if you don't know who battling billy is) Granted the goalies whern't what they are today but just because Bure could move blazing fast and could deke better than most of his peers (on what you see as better goaltending) doesn't negate Gretz point per totals.

You can say what if all you want and i argue all i want, maybe there is no great one, maybe there's no super mario either think about that one? Mario had his best seasons in the early 90's before broduer, lunogo as well.

For that matter, Bure had his career cut short due to injures but his best seasons where in the mid 90's. It's not like Goalies ruled the earth then either,...

After the 95 cup run by the Devils you saw the birth of the death of prolific NHL scoring, the Trap and Defensive zone hockey brought an end to that,...not "Super goalies".

Edited February 7, 2008 by theman19

[DenJ91 0]

i don't think anyone is arguing with anyone, merely bringing up different points of view. i agree with alot of what others including you are saying. i'm not on the forums to argue with anyone, i just like discussing and hearing what others have to say.

[CrossoverThrash 0]

Bossy never looked where he shot, he was just damn lucky to be a 50- 60+ scorer otherwise he might have been a 30-40, hes the best natural goal scorer.

[toby91_ca 620]

I find this amusing. You have made a list of the best pure goal scorers ever, and left off the top three.

That top three being, in no order:

Mario Lemieux. .822 goals per game is just RIDICULOUS. And the guy spent his healthy years with NOBODY to play with.

Mike Bossy. Called by most as the best pure goal scorer of all-time, Bossy was at what would be most star snipers' peak for HIS ENTIRE CAREER. Phenomenal scorer who would be the all-time leader had his career not ended due to injury.

Joe Malone. People (even in this thread) talk about how great Richard is for having scored 50-in-50. Often ignored is one fact; that year Richard broke Malone's single-season NHL and Montreal scoring record of 44 goals, which was set in TWENTY games. He ended up with 51 goals in his first 28 games in the NHL, and 90 in his first 52. In his NHL career, he would score 146 goals in 125 games over five seasons, the last two seasons and 29 games of which would come as a part-time player/coach. In his major professional career, Malone would score 343 goals in 273 games over sixteen seasons. He scored an NHL record 7 goals in a single game. He scored 5 or more goals TEN times. He scored a goal-per-game over an entire season eleven times, clearing the 2 GPG mark for a FULL SEASON three times.

Lemieux's gpg was not .822.

I hear about Malone all the time, but I have a hard time comparing stats to those that existed almost 100 years ago. His scoring was insane, but others scored similar totals in the same era. Actually, Lalonde had a better gpg stat.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

so there are some interesting facts in my opinion. now to throw a wrench in, I wanna bring up Alexander Ovechkin.

Ovechkin

217 games played, 143 goals. that's only 1.52 games to score a goal. in today's game, let's face it the goalies are so good, take up so much net and it's harder to score yet he's doing it at record pace. he may score close to 70 goals this season which would be a modern day record. in just his 3rd season he'll have hit or neared 50+ goals in each season. In 12-15 years from now, will we be hailing Ovechkin as the greatest goal score of all time i wonder?

keep in mind, some of this is hypothetical, it's based on averages and who knows what would have happened in any change of a situation but as far as I'm concerned, when I think of the NHL's best goal scorer of all time, when people say Wayne Gretzky, I don't, I think Pavel Bure

what are your feelings??

The way I look at it is, as you say, scoring is not like it was in the 80's. Defensive systems, dmen and goalies are so much better than they were in the old days as well. All that being said, looking at what AO is doing we should all be wondering WTF and HowTF is he doing it?

In my mind, the guy is making a case that with what he can do in the modern day game, imagine him back then as Gretz winger or Mario's winger.

He'd make Pavel Bure look like Kris Draper. Well, maybe not but you get what i'm saying.

[HomeNugget 2]

since joe malone and newsy lalonde have been mentioned, i'll go ahead and throw cy denneny's name out there. his goals per game was only about .75, but thats good enough to put him in the discussion.

[12Newf 0]

yeah im gonna go with the obvious, gretzky, lemieux and mike bossy but malone is impressive as hell

[auxlepli 17]

Lemieux had scored .822 goals per game prior to his un-retirement in the 2000-2001 season.

Or the way we were mentioning it 1.21.

[imisssergei 0]

Laugh at me if you want, but I am going to give you a name that NEVER gets any respect.

Peter Bondra.

He was scoring goals when it was impossible to score goals. In 1997-98, Bondra scored 52 goals. The Capitals scored only 219. That works itself out to 23.7%. That's NUTS.

Let's get some statistical representation.

Mario Lemieux's best goal scoring year, 1988-89. He scored 85 of the Pens 347 goals, or 24.5%.

Wayne Gretzky's best goal scoring year, 1981-82. He scored 92 of the Oilers 417 goals, or 22%.

Mike Bossy's best goal scoring year, 1978-79. He scored 69 of the NYI's 358 goals, or 19%.

Steve Yzerman's best goal scoring year, 1988-89. He scored 65 of Detroit's 313 goals, or 21%.

Pavel Bure's best goal scoring year, 1993-94. He scored 60 of the 'Nucks 279 goals, or 22%.

(*Bure also score 60 in 1992-93, but the 'Nucks scored more goals that year.)

Alex Ovechkin's best goal scoring year, 2005-06. He scored 52 of Washington's 230 goals, or 23%

Putting Bondra up against any of the greats, and he is right there with every single one of them. What the real difference is, Bondra was scoring when pucks weren't supposed to go in.

Now, I'm not saying he is the greatest goal scorer of all time. But I do think he deserves his due credit when we are talking about the best of all time. There are a few guys who scored more than Bondra over their careers, but he was right there with best.

[imisssergei 0]

Also, why is everyone talking about games per goal? Isn't the more common way to look at that stat goals per game?

That's what I've been accustomed to......

[eva unit zero 271]

Laugh at me if you want, but I am going to give you a name that NEVER gets any respect.

Peter Bondra.

He was scoring goals when it was impossible to score goals. In 1997-98, Bondra scored 52 goals. The Capitals scored only 219. That works itself out to 23.7%. That's NUTS.

Let's get some statistical representation.

Mario Lemieux's best goal scoring year, 1988-89. He scored 85 of the Pens 347 goals, or 24.5%.

Wayne Gretzky's best goal scoring year, 1981-82. He scored 92 of the Oilers 417 goals, or 22%.

Mike Bossy's best goal scoring year, 1978-79. He scored 69 of the NYI's 358 goals, or 19%.

Steve Yzerman's best goal scoring year, 1988-89. He scored 65 of Detroit's 313 goals, or 21%.

Pavel Bure's best goal scoring year, 1993-94. He scored 60 of the 'Nucks 279 goals, or 22%.

(*Bure also score 60 in 1992-93, but the 'Nucks scored more goals that year.)

Alex Ovechkin's best goal scoring year, 2005-06. He scored 52 of Washington's 230 goals, or 23%

Putting Bondra up against any of the greats, and he is right there with every single one of them. What the real difference is, Bondra was scoring when pucks weren't supposed to go in.

Now, I'm not saying he is the greatest goal scorer of all time. But I do think he deserves his due credit when we are talking about the best of all time. There are a few guys who scored more than Bondra over their careers, but he was right there with best.

None of those numbers compares to Brett Hull for St. Louis. From 89-90 to 91-92 his LOW number was 24.4%, and his high number was 27.7%.

The one difference between Bondra and most of the guys you mentioned? All Bondra ever did was shoot. Those other guys put up similar percentages for goals scored while also setting up their teammates for goals.

Easy math example:

Bondra scores 52 goals with 26 assists on a team that scores 219..Bondra is at 23.7%.

Lemieux scores 86 goals with 113 assists on a team that scores 347...Lemieux is at 24.5%

Those appear to be similar numbers, until you consider this:

If we assume for the sake of argument two things:

1) That 60% of a player's assists will be first assists, as those are more common than second assists.

2) That 60% of first assists can be considered to have created the goal where it would not have otherwise happened, as a majority of goals require setup.

Making those two mathematical assumptions with nice round numbers...we come to the following conclusion:

In total, based on these numbers, 36% of a player's assist total created a goal directly.

Therefore Bondra was responsible for 9 goals, Lemieux for 41. Remove those from the team total and recalculate percentage.

Lemieux is now scoring 28.1% of Pittsburgh goals not including those he created directly as a passer. An increase of 3.6%

Bondra is down at 24.7%, as he didn't really do much as a playmaker. An increase of 1%.

Lemieux was already above Bondra, but that illustrates how Lemieux's playmaking skills skew that particular stat against him. I wouldn't be shocked if Lemieux (and other top centermen) was more directly responsible for teammates' goals than credited by those numbers, while Bondra may actually have been even less directly responsible than credited.

[imisssergei 0]

None of those numbers compares to Brett Hull for St. Louis. From 89-90 to 91-92 his LOW number was 24.4%, and his high number was 27.7%.

The one difference between Bondra and most of the guys you mentioned? All Bondra ever did was shoot. Those other guys put up similar percentages for goals scored while also setting up their teammates for goals.

Easy math example:

Bondra scores 52 goals with 26 assists on a team that scores 219..Bondra is at 23.7%.

Lemieux scores 86 goals with 113 assists on a team that scores 347...Lemieux is at 24.5%

Those appear to be similar numbers, until you consider this:

If we assume for the sake of argument two things:

1) That 60% of a player's assists will be first assists, as those are more common than second assists.

2) That 60% of first assists can be considered to have created the goal where it would not have otherwise happened, as a majority of goals require setup.

Making those two mathematical assumptions with nice round numbers...we come to the following conclusion:

In total, based on these numbers, 36% of a player's assist total created a goal directly.

Therefore Bondra was responsible for 9 goals, Lemieux for 41. Remove those from the team total and recalculate percentage.

Lemieux is now scoring 28.1% of Pittsburgh goals not including those he created directly as a passer. An increase of 3.6%

Bondra is down at 24.7%, as he didn't really do much as a playmaker. An increase of 1%.

Lemieux was already above Bondra, but that illustrates how Lemieux's playmaking skills skew that particular stat against him. I wouldn't be shocked if Lemieux (and other top centermen) was more directly responsible for teammates' goals than credited by those numbers, while Bondra may actually have been even less directly responsible than credited.

That's all well and good, but we aren't talking about total points scored, or opportunities created. We are talking about goal scoring ability, so all of the stuff you mentioned is irrelevant in this case.

[eva unit zero 271]

That's all well and good, but we aren't talking about total points scored, or opportunities created. We are talking about goal scoring ability, so all of the stuff you mentioned is irrelevant in this case.

When considering a player's pure goal scoring ability, you absolutely have to remove goals he created but did not score from the equation to get an objective picture when using that kind of stat. If two players both score 10 goals, on teams that scored 200, are they equal in their scoring ability? what if one of them had no assists while the other had 50 assists that directly caused a goal? Those goals don't get scored if the players switch places. Meaning the player who posted assists is actually the better goal scorer based on percentage, as he scored 10 goals and his teammates created 140, while his contemporary scored 10 and his teammates created 190.

For example...the Central Division's top three goal scorers this season are Zetterberg, Boyes, and Nash. In what order would you rank their scoring ability?

Or even better. Radim Vrbata is scoring at a comparable percentage to Zetterberg. Do you think he's an equal goal scorer to Z?

[WingNutt 12]

i'm back, and now that i am i'm sorry about excluding bossy in my original numbers. he was amazing and could easily be considered the best pure goalscorer ever. bobby hull is a good example on how he did leave for another league and would have had more goals.

it wasn't neccesarily a topic where i was saying i was right, that's why i left it open for discussion. as far as i'm concerned all of the mentioned players are legends in their own rights.

anyone think ovechkin could one day be mentioned with the likes of gretzky, howe, bure, bossy etc?? i do

I have to agree Mario should have been listed, had he been healthy his whole career he would have beat The Great One's records or atleast most of them.

[imisssergei 0]

When considering a player's pure goal scoring ability, you absolutely have to remove goals he created but did not score from the equation to get an objective picture when using that kind of stat. If two players both score 10 goals, on teams that scored 200, are they equal in their scoring ability? what if one of them had no assists while the other had 50 assists that directly caused a goal? Those goals don't get scored if the players switch places. Meaning the player who posted assists is actually the better goal scorer based on percentage, as he scored 10 goals and his teammates created 140, while his contemporary scored 10 and his teammates created 190.

For example...the Central Division's top three goal scorers this season are Zetterberg, Boyes, and Nash. In what order would you rank their scoring ability?

Or even better. Radim Vrbata is scoring at a comparable percentage to Zetterberg. Do you think he's an equal goal scorer to Z?

Get out of left field. Setting up a goal has nothing to do with ones goal scoring ability. When speaking of ones ability to set up a goal, we speak of playmaking ability. The two are completely different abilities. It's what makes Brett Hull and Adam Oates such different players.

And for the record, Vrbata's 24 goals are in the same league as Z's 31.

[eva unit zero 271]

Get out of left field. Setting up a goal has nothing to do with ones goal scoring ability. When speaking of ones ability to set up a goal, we speak of playmaking ability. The two are completely different abilities. It's what makes Brett Hull and Adam Oates such different players.

And for the record, Vrbata's 24 goals are in the same league as Z's 31.

Setting up a goal has no direct relationship with one's ability to score goals. But that misses my point; that if you are using a player's percentage of his team's goals scored, you HAVE to consider how his playmaking affects the team's totals because otherwise a sniper who is also a very good playmaker will be hurt by the metric when compared to a player who has the same supporting cast and scoring ability but does not have the playmaking skills. If both players score 50 goals, but one has 100 assists and one has 25...then percentage of total team goals scored does NOT accurately represent the scorer's ability as a direct result of the playmaking skills or lack thereof.

[Doggy 130]

Correction: Bossy

[imisssergei 0]

Setting up a goal has no direct relationship with one's ability to score goals. But that misses my point; that if you are using a player's percentage of his team's goals scored, you HAVE to consider how his playmaking affects the team's totals because otherwise a sniper who is also a very good playmaker will be hurt by the metric when compared to a player who has the same supporting cast and scoring ability but does not have the playmaking skills. If both players score 50 goals, but one has 100 assists and one has 25...then percentage of total team goals scored does NOT accurately represent the scorer's ability as a direct result of the playmaking skills or lack thereof.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but it just doesn't fit here. We are talking about goal scorers, not playmakers.

I'm not trying to say that your point isn't valid. What I am saying is that in this case, it's irrelevant. If we were talking about the best point producers your argument would hold some water. It would be like discussing the greatest home run hitter of all time, and trying to say that because Hank Aaron has more RBI's than Barry Bonds, that makes Aaron the best home run hitter.

[theman19 47]

yes, but if you're throwing stats out there for amount of goals in reference to the percent of goals scored by a player vs. the rest of his team, you're going to get a response like that.

If you say Peter Bondra was the best natural goal scorer based on the stat that he held the highest percentage for his team in a particular year you're missing the point entirly. In the example year you gave, Bondra was tied for the most goals in the league (52) with Selanne. Because Bondra scored more of the caps goals than Selanne scored of the ducks you're saying Bondra is a better goal scorer? I don't think that holds water.

[imisssergei 0]

yes, but if you're throwing stats out there for amount of goals in reference to the percent of goals scored by a player vs. the rest of his team, you're going to get a response like that.

If you say Peter Bondra was the best natural goal scorer based on the stat that he held the highest percentage for his team in a particular year you're missing the point entirly. In the example year you gave, Bondra was tied for the most goals in the league (52) with Selanne. Because Bondra scored more of the caps goals than Selanne scored of the ducks you're saying Bondra is a better goal scorer? I don't think that holds water.

If you read my original post you'll see that I didn't even try to make an argument that Bondra was the best goal scorer. All I was doing with the stats was making the point that he is up there with all of the greats in their best seasons. What percentage of goals a player assists on has no bearing on the goals he scores.

[thedisappearer 291]

How can this thread still be going? The answer is Mike Bossy. Look at his numbers. Retarded sick.

[toby91_ca 620]

I understand the point you are trying to make, but it just doesn't fit here. We are talking about goal scorers, not playmakers.

I'm not trying to say that your point isn't valid. What I am saying is that in this case, it's irrelevant. If we were talking about the best point producers your argument would hold some water. It would be like discussing the greatest home run hitter of all time, and trying to say that because Hank Aaron has more RBI's than Barry Bonds, that makes Aaron the best home run hitter.

Actually, his point is quite valid in terms of disputing against simply looking at number of goals scored as a percentage of team goals scored. All that is going to show you is how you compare to the rest of the players on your team.

If you are on a team full of losers and you score 50% of the goals, that doesn't mean you are a better scorer than a guy that scores 10% of his team's goals.

His point was simply with reference to the % thing, not with goal scoring in general.

[toby91_ca 620]

If you read my original post you'll see that I didn't even try to make an argument that Bondra was the best goal scorer. All I was doing with the stats was making the point that he is up there with all of the greats in their best seasons. What percentage of goals a player assists on has no bearing on the goals he scores.

I read your original post and I know you didn't try to argue that Bondra was the best goal scorer, but you did try to display how he is up there with all the greats just because he scored a large % of his team's goals in comparison to those greats.

I think that statistic is severely flawed and completely irrelevent.