I'll throw my hat in the ring on this one. Scoring stats don't make you the goat, winning does. Hockey isn't like basketball where one player can just overpower the whole team (unless it's Datsyuk and he puts in on a string), so for me the scoring stat doesn't really tell the whole story. For me, it has to be an argument of Gretzky vs. Lidstrom. Both with tons of wins, good longevity, and no junk seasons. They played two very different roles, but they got the job done the best IMO.
Now if we are talking greatest hockey hair of all time, Lemieux is right up there with the best of em.
Ok. I get the era thing. The real GOAT is some kid in Kamloops that needs his diaper changed.
Just like the Woods v. Nicklaus thing. Athletes get better over time. It makes sense and I agree with it for the most part. ... It still makes the entire discussion of a GOAT a bit silly.
Lidstrom is one of the best ever, but I don't think I've ever heard someone make that claim before.
Your very own era-adjusted scoring list doesn't seem to have Nick's name on it (not that pure points per game ought to be the only consideration).
One of my leagues started up last night. It was good to see everyone again. One team dropped out, uncomfortable with the current situation, but for the most part it was pretty much business as usual.
USAPL 9-ball. Fargo Rate based handicapping.
For those unfamiliar, whoever sinks the 9-ball wins the game and gets 14 points, loser gets one point for each ball they pocketed. Match is handicapped with the better player having to earn more points to win the match. In my case last night, I needed something like 65 pts to his 51 pts.
Shaking off a little competitive rust, but played well and easily won 70/12.
I’m out of town watching the grandson while my daughter/son in law work from home. I get out to the range/9 hole par 3 when I can. As a single player right now I haven’t even attempted to get a tee time at a regulation course. If I was back home I’m sure I could pull it off