Is Daniel Sedin the most clutch goal-scorer in NHL history?

[canuck73_3]

22 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Awesome fact digging. I'll vote no.

 

How many Stanley Cups does he have?

Cups are a team trophy, one man alone can't win a cup. If it were true Gretzky would have won one in LA. 

[bigbadcanucks]

For me, Daniel (and Henrik) will be remembered for a lot of great on-ice things (i.e., Sedinery).  But the word "clutch" isn't one that I reflexively think of when I think of the Sedins (in spite of some compelling quantitative analysis Tas has presented)...and I saw a lot of the Sedins while they were at their best from 2006 to 2012 as a season ticket holder. 

 

I'm wondering if the Analytics crowd has ever measured the "quality" of goals scored (i.e., does a game winning goal have greater importance than a goal that starts a three goal rally to come back to win a big game?).

 

One thing for sure, Tas has presented some compelling data that stimulated some interesting discussion.  A welcomed diversion on a hot summer evening.

 

Coming to think about it...I consider Burrows to be the most clutch goal scorer in the past decade.  But that begs an answer to the question, does that make the Sedins equally clutch for facilitating Burrows' "clutchness" (i.e., hockey is a five man-unit game, after all).

 

But to answer Tas's original question, I wouldn't consider Daniel to be the most clutch goal scorer on the strength of his 22% of goals being GWG.  I would argue that the absolute number is more of an indicator of "clutchness" than relative number (if we are going to suggest that GWG is a measure of clutchness). 

 

Now, I'm just rambling, so I'll stop now.

[tas]

3 minutes ago, bigbadcanucks said:

For me, Daniel (and Henrik) will be remembered for a lot of great on-ice things (i.e., Sedinery).  But the word "clutch" isn't one that I reflexively think of when I think of the Sedins (in spite of some compelling quantitative analysis Tas has presented)...and I saw a lot of the Sedins while they were at their best from 2006 to 2012 as a season ticket holder. 

 

I'm wondering if the Analytics crowd has ever measured the "quality" of goals scored (i.e., does a game winning goal have greater importance than a goal that starts a three goal rally to come back to win a big game?).

 

One thing for sure, Tas has presented some compelling data that stimulated some interesting discussion.  A welcomed diversion on a hot summer evening.

 

Coming to think about it...I consider Burrows to be the most clutch goal scorer in the past decade.  But that begs an answer to the question, does that make the Sedins equally clutch for facilitating Burrows' "clutchness" (i.e., hockey is a five man-unit game, after all).

 

But to answer Tas's original question, I wouldn't consider Daniel to be the most clutch goal scorer on the strength of his 22% of goals being GWG.  I would argue that the absolute number is more of an indicator of "clutchness" than relative number (if we are going to suggest that GWG is a measure of clutchness). 

 

Now, I'm just rambling, so I'll stop now.

Thanks. That was really the whole purpose of thread. There was a reason I formed it as a question rather than a statement: I don't believe it myself, but I thought it was worth the discussion. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 hours ago, Patrick Kane said:

How many playoff overtime goals does he have?

More than Xmas cards Kane has received from cab drivers.

[Hockey God]

Glenn Anderson?  Hated him as a bit of a dirty player, and don't know off the top of my head how many GWGs he had, but man, he was a killer of momentum when he scored.

[Phat Fingers]

To answer the poster, No,

because the idea of clutch is a mystic of making the crucial goal to win a championship in the final seconds or triple OT for example. 

 

The most notworthy goal like this during the twins tenure is ‘Slaying the Dragon’ and Dank didn’t score that one. 

 

It would have taken a clutch SCF winning goal to make that a reality, because there is no other metric but winning it all that secured the ‘clutch’ mystic. 

[IBatch]

On 2018-07-14 at 2:58 PM, tas said:

What if I told you that Daniel is also 3rd all-time in regular season overtime goals, and again accounting for a larger percentage of total goals scored than the other players around him on the list?

Problem with that from a historical standpoint is that overtime wasn't re-introduced until a 1983 after a 41 year absecnce and then in then around the time D. Sedin started playing they went to the 4 on 4 format, at which time both M.Sundin and J.Jager were tied with 15 a piece with Elias and Federov not far back.  The loser point came into play and inflated decades of stats (82 points used to be good enough to make the playoffs, 90 points very good and 100 points dominated).   D. Sedins played under the new format, and the tie diminished.  Guys like Hull, Howe, Espisito, R. Richard never got that bump in GWG and if Gretzky and Lemuiex got to play 4 on 4, and even Bure, wow, just wow their stats would be even more incredible.   

 

Yes D.Sedin GWG were impressive, but he wad never considered clutch like Jason Williams and Glen Anderson, Linden was more clutch as anyone who watched the 94 run would attest too (if Ronning and Lafayette didn't miss those wide open nets Lindens two goals would have been enough for a cup).   Burrows was more clutch even, he slayed  the dragon, and Beiksa's knuckleball beat a SJ team that had outplayed us two games in a row and would have been back in the series...

[IBatch]

On 2018-07-14 at 3:39 PM, Brock Botanen said:

I sound like a Sedin hater and I am very far from it, but you have to adjust for the crash and bang playoffs. We were the best team in hockey 2 consecutive years and a big reason for that was the Sedins, but when we needed them most they were easily shut down and we failed to win the cup. If they were so clutch they would of found a way to be clutch for just 1 game (game 7 vs Bruins). Instead we were shutout on home ice, and swept out of round 1 the following year. We've been rebuilding ever since

This exactly...mic drop end of discussion.

[The_Rocket]

If gwg goals as a percentage of total goals is an indicator of clutchness, then pouliot must be the most clutch player of all time. He has 5 goals in his career and they’re all game winners (no one else has ever scored gwg for their first 5 career goals). 

[CrosbyGold]

Bure and Linden

[Kevin Biestra]

On 7/14/2018 at 10:03 PM, Hockey God said:

Glenn Anderson?  Hated him as a bit of a dirty player, and don't know off the top of my head how many GWGs he had, but man, he was a killer of momentum when he scored.

 

One of the all-time greats at playing to the maximum of his abilities when it mattered the most.  He wasn't up there with Gretzky and Coffey and Messier in talent and regular seasons numbers, but he's up there with them in playoff numbers.

 

Linden is another one of the all-time greats (for the NHL, not just the Canucks) in harnessing whatever he has and utilizing all of it when everything is on the line.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

One of the all-time greats at playing to the maximum of his abilities when it mattered the most.  He wasn't up there with Gretzky and Coffey and Messier in talent and regular seasons numbers, but he's up there with them in playoff numbers.

 

Linden is another one of the all-time greats (for the NHL, not just the Canucks) in harnessing whatever he has and utilizing all of it when everything is on the line.

You bet, when Linden retired he was a top hundred scorer and one of the best leaders of his generation, he never won a cup or any major individual award but  even without that there were some rumblings that he was important enough to be a fringe HHOF, in the same league and Captain Canada Ryan Smith.  Not quite good enough.  Andersons stats look nothing like Messier and Gretzky, but he did score 500 goals, but he was Mr. Clutch in the playoffs when they needed a big goal.  Enough for the HHOF.  Until Williams came along with his game seven heroics and a conn Smythe, nobody except maybe Claude Lemuiex could touch him when it came to clutch abilities.

[riffraff]

Clutch

[mpt]

Sorry, you can’t be clutch when you don’t score in Game 7

[Kevin Biestra]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

You bet, when Linden retired he was a top hundred scorer and one of the best leaders of his generation, he never won a cup or any major individual award but  even without that there were some rumblings that he was important enough to be a fringe HHOF, in the same league and Captain Canada Ryan Smith.  Not quite good enough.  Andersons stats look nothing like Messier and Gretzky, but he did score 500 goals, but he was Mr. Clutch in the playoffs when they needed a big goal.  Enough for the HHOF.  Until Williams came along with his game seven heroics and a conn Smythe, nobody except maybe Claude Lemuiex could touch him when it came to clutch abilities.

I remember Linden being perhaps the only player that showed up for the bronze medal game at the 98 Olympics, and that was after scoring Canada's only goal in the semi-final at all.

[EternalCanuckFan]

It would be interesting to see stats for:

 

1. player with most game-tying goals scored prior to the outcome of the game (i.e. last game tying goal scored in a game whether or not the player's team lost.  This would be to eliminate the previous game-tying goals in a game); and
    
2. player with the most game-winning goals scored following a game-tying goal scored by either team or after the 2nd period of a game with a shutout (would include OT goals but not shootouts).

 

It's an imperfect set of criteria but perhaps that would help to weed out goals scored at the beginning of a 3-0 game.  Those goals are still important but if the point is to measure how "clutch" a player is, then I would suggest that you would have to qualify the goals to see if they were scored in higher pressure portions of a game.  A 1-0 goal in the first period of a 5-0 game is important but it definitely feels different than a 3-3 goal to tie a game in the last minute of the 3rd or a 4-3 goal to win the game in OT.

[Where'd Luongo?]

You answered your own question. Playoffs performances are the only time anyone can earn the term clutch.

[tas]

48 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

You answered your own question. Playoffs performances are the only time anyone can earn the term clutch.

I beg to differ

 

edit: to add to this, I'd argue that even though it didn't "mean anything", the sedins' performances in game 82 in 2009-10 and game 81 in 2017-18 would classify as clutch. the results of the games didn't make a difference in the standings, but those performances, in those moments, sure mattered a hell of a lot to all of us, and they stepped up big time. 

[Where'd Luongo?]

29 minutes ago, tas said:

I beg to differ

 

edit: to add to this, I'd argue that even though it didn't "mean anything", the sedins' performances in game 82 in 2009-10 and game 81 in 2017-18 would classify as clutch. the results of the games didn't make a difference in the standings, but those performances, in those moments, sure mattered a hell of a lot to all of us, and they stepped up big time. 

Game 81 last season they looked great, too bad they didn't do that when it mattered most AKA they weren't clutch.

[IBatch]

5 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

I remember Linden being perhaps the only player that showed up for the bronze medal game at the 98 Olympics, and that was after scoring Canada's only goal in the semi-final at all.

That right there says a lot, Hasek made some incredible saves throughout the game and the shoot-out and those Olympics were such a big deal given no NHL players had participated forever.  Canada iced a packed All-Star team that could have waxed some of the later additions, Hasek was just at the peak of his powers.  We had excellent goaltending too, I truly believe if the game kept going we would have beat them.   Linden was also the president of the players association for years while he played, both a clutch performer and a leader amongst leaders.