Point Allocation v1.

0 Original Six Era methodology

Introduction

In 2002, Iain Fyffe created a system (Point Allocation) that allocates the points a team earns in the
standings to each player on the team, based on their on-ice contributions1. At a high level, this was
based upon Win Shares, the brilliant system devised by baseball analyst Bill James. Iains system was, at
the time, cutting-edge. Over the past decade, Iain created a significantly modified (and improved)
version of Point Allocation2. Methodologies with similar objectives have been created by Alan Ryder3,
Tom Awad4 and Justin Kubatko5.

I want to apply Point Allocation to the Original Six era. More specifically, I will examine the 1952-53
through 1966-676 seasons, as we have a complete record of goalie save percentages during those fifteen
years. Point Allocation and similar systems require the availability of certain detailed statistics, including
ice time, or goals for & goals against data (which can be used to estimate ice time with a high degree of
accuracy). This data simply does not exist for the Original Six era7 therefore the calculation of Defensive
Points is, admittedly, quite crude. However, I think a reasonable estimate of Point Allocation is better
than nothing at all.

The majority of this methodology is based upon Iains first draft of Point Allocation. I found it easiest to
adapt it to the Original Six era. Many of the calculations used here are taken directly from Iains paper. I
acknowledge that Iain created those calculations and I take no credit for them.

Marginal Goals For and Marginal Goals Against

Marginal goals for refers to the number of goals a team scores, over and above the number of goals a
team of (theoretical) marginal players would have scored. Marginal goals against refers to the number
of goals a team allows, below the number of goals a team of (theoretical) marginal players would have
allowed. There is a strong correlation between teams total marginal goals and the number of points
earned in the standings (from 1953 to 1967, the correlation is 0.92).

1
Iain Fyffe, Point Allocation. http://www.hockeythink.com/research/ptalloc.html
2
Iain Fyffe, Point Allocation, version 2.0. http://www.hockeythink.com/research/Point_Allocation_v2.pdf
3
Alan Ryder, Player Contribution.
http://www.hockeyanalytics.com/Research_files/Player_Contribution_System.pdf
4
Tom Awad, Goals Versus Average. http://www.hockeythink.com/research/gva.html
5
Justin Kubatko, Calculating Point Shares. http://www.hockey-reference.com/about/point_shares.html
6
Going forward, Ill refer to the 1953-54 season as 1954; the 1966-67 season as 1967; etc.
7
During the Original Six era, some teams kept track of plus-minus data which could, in theory, allow us to estimate
ice time and perform a more rigorous Point Allocation analysis. However, as far as I know, none of this data still
exists. Refer to the 2001 edition of The Hockey Compendium by Jeff Z. Klein and Karl-Eric Reif for a discussion of
how the Montreal Canadiens plus/minus data was left in an employees basement and ruined in a flood.
Ive assumed that a team of marginal players would score 7/12th as many goals as an average team (and
a team of marginal players would allow 19/12th as many goals as an average team). I quote hockey-
reference.com, which provides a cogent theoretical justification:

Why 7/12? At even strengh a team has six players on the ice, five skaters and one goalie. Imagine each
of these players having two chips to contribute to one of two buckets: offense and defense. Collectively
the skaters will contribute five chips to the offensive bucket and five chips to the defensive bucket.
However, the goalie will contribute both of his chips to the defensive bucket, giving the defensive bucket
seven of the twelve chips.8

As an example, the 1953 Detroit Red Wings scored 222 goals and allowed 133, when the league average
was 167.7. They earned a 36-16-18 record, yielding 90 points over the 70 game schedule.

Marginal goals for = 222 (167.7 * 7 / 12) = 124.2

Marginal goals against = (167.7 * 19 / 12 ) 133 = 132.5

In total, the Red Wings had 256.7 marginal goals (124.2 + 132.5), which are allocated 48.4% to Goal
Creation (124.2 / 256.7) and 51.6% to Goal Prevention (132.5 / 256.7). Of the 90 points they earned in
the standings, we allocate 43.5 to Goal Creation (90 * 48.4%) and 46.5 to Goal Prevention (90 * 51.6%).
Thus, the Red Wings were a dominant and balanced team.

Allocating Points from Goal Creation to Skaters

We must calculate the Goals Created (or GC) for each player on each team9. GC equals one-half of
the players goals, plus one-half of the players assists divided by the ratio of assists to goals on that
team. In practical terms, the sum of Goals Created will equal the total goals scored for each team.

As an example, Gordie Howe scored 49 goals and 46 assists in 1953. That season, there were 1.45 assists
per goal in Detroit. Thus, Mr. Hockey gets credit for (49 / 2) + (46 / 2 / 1.45) = 40.4 goals created. In
total, Red Wings scored 222 goals10, thus Howe earns 18.2% (40.4 / 222) of the teams 43.5 points from
Goal Creation. This equals 7.9 (0.182 * 43.5) Points Allocated to Offense (PAO). This is, according to
Point Allocation, the greatest offensive season during the Original Six era11.

8
Kubatko refer to Section III of paper.
9
Goals and assists from goalies, if any, are ignored as they are largely a product of luck.
10
By design, the number of goals a team scores will exactly equal the sum of each players goals created.
11
Some might wonder why Im looking at each players total offensive production, rather than marginal offensive
production. As Iain noted in his second version of point allocation, some players produce virtually no offense, thus
although there are marginal goals at the team level, that concept isnt relevant at the individual level.
Allocating Points from Goal Prevention between Defense and Goaltending

The next step is to allocate points to the teams defense (whose primary job is to minimize the number
of shots the goalies face) and the teams goaltending (whose primary job is to stop the shots they
face)12. This is an oversimplification, as the defenses job is really to minimize the quantity and quality of
shots the goalie faces; however, theres no way to measure shot difficulty for the Original Six era. Ill let
the reader decide whether this represents a significant deficiency.

To calculate marginal goals from defense (MGD), we calculate the number of marginal goals a team
would allow, based on the teams actual number of shots allowed and the league average save
percentage. Essentially, we ignore the strength of the teams goaltending (by using the league average
save percentage) and attribute any marginal goals prevented to the actual number of shots the defense
allows.

To calculate marginal goals from goaltending (MGG), we calculate the number of marginal goals a team
would allow, based on the league average number of shots allowed and the teams actual save
percentage. Essentially, we ignore the strength of the teams defense (by using the league average shots
allowed) and attribute any marginal goals prevented to the goalies effectiveness at stopping the puck13.

Next, we take the total points from goal prevention, as calculated earlier. We divide this between
defense (weighted by a factor of 4.9) and goaltending. This reflects the fact that there are, on average,
4.9 skaters on the ice at any given time14, and one goaltender.

Heres an example, again using the 1953 Detroit Red Wings:

Marginal goals from defense (MGD) = Marginal goals against - (actual shots against * (1 league average save percentage))

= (167.7 * 19 / 12) * (1,845 * (1 0.91586))

= 110.2

Marginal goals from goaltending (MGG)= Marginal goals against (average shots against * (1 actual save percentage)

= (167.7 * 19 / 12) * (1,993 * (1 0.92791))

= 121.8

Points from goal prevention = 46.5

Points allocated to defense (PAD) = 46.5 * 4.9 * 110.2 / (110.2 * 4.9 + 121.8)

12
To clarify, defense means the teams ability to prevent shots. Just as offense is a product of both forwards and
defensemen, defense is also a product of both positions.
13
I havent removed the goalies shots and saves data when calculating the league average. Perhaps an area for
improvement in the next draft?
14
This is a rough estimate. Obviously, there are typically five skaters on the ice, but sometimes there are fewer
(when a team is shorthanded), and rarely are there more (goalie pulled for an extra attacker). I think that an
average of 4.9 skaters is reasonable, but would be interested if anyone has a more rigorous way to estimate this.
 = 37.9

Points allocated to goaltending (PAG) = 46.5 * 121.8 / (110.2 * 4.9 + 121.8)

= 8.5

Allocating Points from Defense to Players

Ill be upfront the biggest limitation with applying Point Allocation to the Original Six era is the inability
to rigorously analyze players contributions to defense. Without ice time or the plus/minus component
data, we simply dont have much to work with.

Ideally, I would have liked to allocate teams Points Allocated to Defense (PAD) in proportion to each
players ice time. Since that isnt possible, Ive allocated PAD to each player in proportion to the number
of games played, with a positional adjustment (forward games played are unadjusted and defensemen
games played are double-weighted15). This means that all teammates, who play the same number of
games at the same position, earn the same PAD. Obviously, this isnt realisticfor example, on the 1953
Detroit Red Wings, defensemen Red Kelly and Benny Woit both earn 3.9 PAD, since both played 70
games. If ice time was tracked, Im sure it would show that Kelly played far more per game than Woit
(and therefore contributed more to the teams defense). However, since this data is unavailable, well
have to accept this as a limitation of the methodology.

The 1953 Red Wings featured 700 games played by forwards and 337 games played by defensemen.
Thus, they have 1,374 adjusted games played (700 + (337 *2)). Gordie Howe played 70 games, so he gets
credit for 5.1% (70 / 1,374) of their Points Allocated to Defense. In total, Mr. Hockey earns 1.9 PAD (37.9
* 0.051).

Allocating Points from Goaltending to Goaltenders

The allocation of Points from Goaltending to individual goaltenders uses the same approach employed
earlier when calculating marginal goals from goaltending, except everything is pro-rated to the number
of games played16.

Heres an example using Terry Sawchuk (he played 3,780 of a possible 4,200 minutes for the 1953
Detroit Red Wings, or 63 of a possible 70 games). The average goalie allowed 2.40 goals per game and
the average team allowed 28.5 shots per game.

Marginal goals from goaltending (MGG)= Marginal goals against (total shots against * (1 actual save percentage)

15
Games played from defensemen need to be extra-weighted to reflect the fact that they generally have more
defensive responsibilities than forwards. That being said, I dont have a strong justification for why I weigh their
games by two; does anybody have any thoughts on if this is appropriate?
16
Ive ignored the impact of empty-net goals. This data doesnt exist (or more accurately, it exists but has never
been compiled) until 1963. For the last four years in the study, there were 47 empty-net goals, just under two per
team per year. I consider that immaterial.
 = (2.40 * 63 * 19 / 12) * (28.5 * 63 * (1 0.92835))

= 110.7

We previously established that the 1953 Red Wings had 121.8 marginal goals from goaltending, and 8.5
Points Allocated to Goaltending. Thus, Sawchuk earns 110.7 / 121.8 * 8.5 = 7.8 Points Allocated to
Goaltending. In total, the three Detroit netminders combined for 121.6 marginal goals from goaltending
(this equals the 121.8 marginal goals from goaltending we calculated earlier, aside from a trivial
rounding difference) and 8.5 Points Allocated to Goaltending.

Total Points Allocated

For skaters, Points Allocated is the sum of their offensive and defensive points. For example, in 1953,
Gordie Howe contributed 7.9 points from offense and 1.9 points from defense, which equals 9.8 points
in total. This is the greatest season from a skater in the fifteen years Ive studied. Points Allocated for
goalies simply equals their Points Allocated to Goaltending.

Calculation Check

Here are a few quick sanity checks Ive done to ensure that the system balances the way it should.

Total points in standings = points allocated to goal creation + points allocated to goal prevention
o Confirmed. The teams earned 6,300 points in the standings (70 games per season * 6 teams * 15 seasons).
In total, there were 2,627.4 points allocated to goal creation and 3,672.6 points allocated to goal
prevention, which equals the 6,300 points allocated. Also note that 41.7% of the points were allocated to
th
goal creation, which equals the 5/12 ratio I discussed earlier.
Sum of each players Points Allocated to Offense should equal total points allocated to goal creation
o Confirmed. As discussed above, there were 2,627.4 points allocated to goal creation. The sum of each
players individual PAO equals 2,627.2 points (difference is due to rounding).
Sum of each players Points Allocated to Defense and Points Allocated to Goaltending should equal total points
allocated to goal prevention.
o Confirmed. As discussed above, there were 3,672.6 points allocated to defense. The sum of each players
individual PAD (3,035.6) and PAG (636.9) equals 3,672.5 (difference is due to rounding).
Sum of the Points Allocated for each team should equal the teams points in the standings.
o Confirmed (mostly). For 86 of the 90 teams, the sum of the individual players Points Allocated exactly equals
the number of points the teams earned in the standings. (For example, if you add up the PA for each player
on the 1953 Detroit Red Wings, youd get exactly 90 points, which equals the number of points they earned
in the standings). For the four remaining teams, there are minor differences, the largest being 1.3%. This
occurs because there are discrepancies in the official NHL data for example, the 1954 Chicago Blackhawks
are officially credited with scoring 133 goals, but if you add up the goals scored by each team member, you
get 136, thus causing the discrepancy in the Point Allocation system. Given that this issue only affects four
out of ninety teams, and the average error is never more than 1.3%, Im satisfied that the system works the
way it should.
Data Sources

All team statistics (records, goals for, and goals against) and skater (non-goalie) statistics were obtained
from hockey-reference.com. As discussed above in the last point in the Calculation Check section,
there appear to be a very limited number of errors with the data, however it would not have a material
impact on these numbers.

All goalie statistics were obtained from the Yahoo Hockey Analysis Group17. Note that the spreadsheet
contains detailed documentation about all of the possible discrepancies in the goalies statistics; Ive
assumed that the data recorded in the spreadsheet is correct.

17
Hockeydad55. "Complete Goalie Stats from 52-53 to 82-83.xls" in the Yahoo Hockey Analysis Group.
Point Allocation v1.0 Original Six era results
Top twenty-five players of the Original Six era

Player GP PAO PAD PAG PA PA/70

Gordie Howe (RW) 1,100 76.5 28.7 - 105.1 6.7

Glenn Hall (G) 764 - - 94.6 94.6 8.7

Red Kelly (D/C) 1,057 42.6 45.3 - 87.9 5.8

Jean Beliveau (C) 862 62.3 24.9 - 87.1 7.1

Terry Sawchuk (G) 769 - - 83.2 83.2 7.6

Alex Delvecchio (C) 1,089 50.2 28.3 - 78.5 5.0

Jacques Plante (G) 654 - - 78.4 78.4 8.4

Bernie Geoffrion (RW) 806 54.0 23.3 - 77.3 6.7

Marcel Pronovost (D) 1,058 18.0 56.4 - 74.4 4.9

Tim Horton (D) 982 19.0 52.9 - 71.9 5.1

Doug Harvey (D) 813 25.1 43.9 - 69.0 5.9

Gump Worsley (G) 678 - - 68.8 68.8 7.1

Johnny Bower (G) 486 - - 67.0 67.0 9.7

Bill Gadsby (D) 995 25.3 40.9 - 66.2 4.7

Henri Richard (C) 764 44.1 22.1 - 66.2 6.1

Allan Stanley (D) 951 19.5 46.5 - 65.9 4.9

Andy Bathgate (RW) 919 47.4 17.6 - 65.0 5.0

Tom Johnson (D) 907 14.4 49.4 - 63.7 4.9

Dickie Moore (LW) 692 39.8 20.0 - 59.8 6.0

Jean-Guy Talbot (D) 791 13.6 45.7 - 59.3 5.2

George Armstrong (C) 962 33.3 25.8 - 59.1 4.3

Norm Ullman (C) 817 38.1 20.5 - 58.7 5.0

Bobby Hull (LW) 674 40.9 17.5 - 58.5 6.1

Pierre Pilote (D) 747 20.8 36.9 - 57.7 5.4

Claude Provost (RW) 794 31.8 23.0 - 54.8 4.8

Gordie Howe is shown to be the greatest player of the Original Six era. The native of Floral,
Saskatchewan, is rightfully known as Mr. Hockey, as he epitomized everything that makes hockey
great he was fast and skilled, tough and mean, equally adept at scoring goals or setting up teammates.
In addition to being an elite scorer, he was a good two-way player and tough, aggressive physical
presence. Howe combined a dominant peak and high-quality longevity better than any other player in
history. Keep in mind that this analysis excludes two of his Art Ross seasons (1951 and 1952), and
includes some of his declining years, which explains his surprisingly low per-game average.

Chicagos two star forwards, Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita, only rank as low as they do because they didnt
debut until 1958 and 1959, respectively. The strong, speedy left-winger ranks fifth among skaters on a
per-game basis18 (behind only Beliveau, M. Richard, Geoffrion and Howe) while the scrappy, two-way
centre ranks eight among skaters (behind the five aforementioned players, H. Richard, and Moore).

Initially, I was surprised not to see Maurice Richard and Ted Lindsay on this list; they epitomize the
passion and boldness of the Original Six era. Keep in mind that their careers lasted from 1943-60 and
1945-196019 respectively, thus many of their best years were outside the scope of this study.

According to Point Allocation, Red Kelly is the eras best defenseman. The skilled, cerebral blueliner was
the dominant offensive defenseman of his era, and was also an exceptional defender. Although hes
been surpassed by the great Swede, Ive always considered Nicklas Lidstrom to be Kellys modern
equivalent; the fact that they spent most/all of their career in Detroit makes this an especially likable
comparison. Note that Ive split Kellys time between defense (his time in Detroit) and centre (his time in
Toronto); his total in the chart above reflects the sum of both.

Doug Harvey ranks fourth among defensemen. Thats not bad, but Harvey is obviously the best
defenseman of the Original Six era (he won seven Norris trophies in a span of eight seasons). As
discussed earlier, Point Allocation awards defensive credit in an imprecise way. Harvey is generally
considered the best defensive defenseman of this era, but he doesnt get full credit for his exceptional
shutdown ability due to the inherent limitations in the system. Iain Fyffe attempted to get around this
problem by using a defensive fudge factor in another version of Point Allocation for the earliest days
of hockey20, which I havent tried to replicate here. Im quite satisfied with the results Ive obtained even
without any fudge factors.

Generally, goaltenders have more points allocated to them than any other positions. This occurs
because 10.1% of all points are allocated to goalies21, even though they represent just one of eighteen

18
Minimum 100 games played.
19
Lindsay also had an admirable but ineffective comeback five years after retirement in 1965, at age 39.
20
Iain Fyffe various posts on http://hockeyhistorysis.blogspot.ca/
21
This makes sense 636.9 out of 6,299.8 points are allocated to goalies, which represents 10.1% of all points. The
th th
methodology allocates 7/12 of all points to goal prevention, and 1/5.9 of all goal prevention points to goalies, so
wed expect 9.9% of points to be allocated to goalies. Im not quite sure where the difference comes from
presumably its due to rounding and/or the impact of me looking at total goals (including empty-netters) at the
team level, while ignoring empty-net goals at the goalie level. As discussed earlier, this data isnt available for the
players on the roster. Hall is ranked as the best goaltender of the Original Six era. Dont take my word
for it; he was named the leagues best goalie six times and runner-up four times22 during the fifteen
years Ive studied.

Sawchuk ranks second, primarily on the strength of his incredible performance in Detroit from 1953
through 1955. For years Ive considered Sawchuk overrated because his level of performance dropped
dramatically after being traded away from the powerhouse Detroit Red Wings in a massive nine-player
deal in June 1955. Five of Sawchuks seven all-star berths, all five of the times he was top two in GAA,
and every time he led the league in either wins or shutouts all came when he played behind the
leagues most dominant team. Given that he was only 26 at the time of the trade, I would have expected
Sawchuk to be more productive for the rest of his long career. For the remainder of his career (1956-67),
Sawchuk ranks last among goalies in Point Allocation23, both in total and on a per-game basis. I cant
detract from Sawchuks incredible dominance early in his career in Detroit, but the anecdotal evidence
suggests that he was at least partially a product of his team.

first eleven years of the study, and the distortion would be less than two goals per team, per season for the
remaining four years.
22
We cant look at the Vezina trophy because, until 1983, it was simply awarded to the goalie(s) on the team with
the lowest GAA, much like the modern Jennings trophy. However, we can look to first- and second- all-star teams
to see which goalies were considered the best by the media.
23
Minimum 300 games played.
Top five players each season Point Allocation versus Hart trophy voting

1953

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Gordie Howe (RW) Gordie Howe (RW)
2 Jim Henry (G) Al Rollins (G)
3 Gerry McNeil (G) Red Kelly (D)
4 Terry Sawchuk (G) Gerry McNeil (G)
5 Ted Lindsday (LW) Ted Kennedy (C)

In 1953, Mr. Hockey has one of the most dominant seasons in NHL history. He scored 95 points, giving
him a staggering 56% edge in scoring over Maurice Richard, his closest non-teammate. Gordie Howe is
the rightful winner of the Hart trophy.

1954

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Terry Sawchuk (G) Al Rollins (G)
2 Johnny Bower (G) Red Kelly (D)
3 Gordie Howe (RW) Maurice Richard (RW)
4 Harry Lumley (G) Gordie Howe (RW)
5 Red Kelly (D) Harry Lumley (G)

Al Rollins was the least deserving Hart trophy winner of the past sixty years. The Blackhawks were a
horrendous team; they earned the fewest points out of any team between 1953 and 1967, and they also
had the fewest points allocated to goal prevention. Rollins deserves credit for not having a nervous
breakdown mid-season, but does he really deserve the Hart trophy for that?

1955

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Harry Lumley (G) Ted Kennedy (C)
2 Terry Sawchuk (G) Harry Lumley (G)
3 Bernie Geoffrion (RW) Maurice Richard (RW)
4 Maurice Richard (RW) Jean Beliveau (C)
5 Jean Beliveau (C) Doug Harvey (D)

Ted Kennedy wins the Hart trophy despite having a mediocre year statistically; its often rumoured that
the popular player was given a retirement award by the media. For what its worth, Kennedy ranks
39th in the league in Point Allocation. The system sees Toronto goalie Harry Lumley, the Hart trophy
runner-up, as the leagues best player. Note that the Richard Riot occurred late in the 1955 season. Had
Richard not been suspended following his altercation with a linesman, he very likely would have won the
Art Ross trophy. He also likely would have ranked first among skaters in Point Allocation.
1956

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Jean Beliveau (C) Jean Beliveau (C)
2 Jacques Plante (G) Tod Sloan (C)
3 Gump Worsley (G) Gump Worsley (G)
4 Maurice Richard (RW) Red Kelly (D)
5 Glenn Hall (G) Doug Harvey (D)

Le Gros Bill has the best season of his career, winning his only Art Ross trophy. According to Point
Allocation, this is the best season by any skater other than Howe.

1957

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Glenn Hall (G) Gordie Howe (RW)
2 Gordie Howe (RW) Jean Beliveau (C)
3 Ted Lindsay (LW) Andy Bathgate (RW)
4 Jean Beliveau (C) Terry Sawchuk (G)
5 Doug Harvey (D) Doug Harvey (D)

Gordie Howe wins the fifth Art Ross trophy of his career; he wins the Hart and is ranked first among
skaters in Point Allocation. Terry Sawchuk finishes 4th in Hart voting despite only playing 34 games; this
is a product of the Hart voting system at the time, wherein voting is conductive halfway through the
season and again at the end. Sawchuk was third in Hart balloting during the mid-season vote but didnt
receive a single vote at year-end.

1958

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Dickie Moore (LW) Gordie Howe (RW)
2 Jacques Plante (G) Andy Bathgate (RW)
3 Henri Richard (C) Doug Harvey (D)
4 Terry Sawchuk (G) Henri Richard (C)
5 Doug Harvey (D) Glenn Hall (G)

Dickie Moore leads the NHL in scoring but finishes 8th in Hart voting. I can only think of one instance over
the past sixty years of an Art Ross winner finishing lower than that in Hart voting (Wayne Gretzky
actually failed to get a single vote for the Hart in 1994 a victim of impossibly high standards24).

24
Id be interested in having somebody who believes in a league-wide pro-Gretzky conspiracy explain how The
Great One is the only Art Ross trophy winner in NHL history to not receive a single vote for the Hart trophy.
1959

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Jacques Plante (G) Andy Bathgate (RW)
2 Dickie Moore (LW) Gordie Howe (RW)
3 Jean Beliveau (C) Jean Beliveau (C)
4 Gump Worsley (G) Terry Sawchuk (G)
5 Andy Bathgate (RW) Dickie Moore (LW)

Similar to 1958, Dickie Moore wins the Art Ross trophy and finishes a comparatively unimpressive 5th in
Hart balloting. This years result might be even more egregious, given that Moore sets the single-season
scoring record with 96 points. Andy Bathgate becomes the second most recent player to win the Hart on
a non-playoff team (the most recent was Mario Lemieux in 1988).

1960

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Johnny Bower (G) Gordie Howe (RW)
2 Glenn Hall (G) Bobby Hull (LW)
3 Jacques Plante (G) Glenn Hall (G)
4 Henri Richard (C) Jean Beliveau (C)
5 Jean Beliveau (C) Bert Olmstead (LW)

Gordie Howe wins his fifth Hart trophy, but he was a poor selection. Howe ranked 15th in Point
Allocation. My methodology sees Johnny Bower as the leagues best player, and he fails to earn a single
vote for the Hart.

1961

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Glenn Hall (G) Bernie Geoffrion (RW)
2 Johnny Bower (G) Johnny Bower (G)
3 Bernie Geoffrion (RW) Gordie Howe (RW)
4 Frank Mahovlich (LW) Frank Mahovlich (LW)
5 Jean Beliveau (C) Glenn Hall (G)

Geoffrion ties Richards single-season goal-scoring record, scoring fifty times during the season.
Although Geoffrion accomplished this feat in seventy games (it took Richard fifty), Boom Boom did so
in a fully-stocked league; Richards feat is less impressive because a significant number of the NHLs
players were enrolled in military service during the Second World War at the time. Point Allocation
agrees that Geoffrion was the leagues best skater this year.
1962

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Jacques Plante (G) Jacques Plante (G)
2 Glenn Hall (G) Doug Harvey (D)
3 Johnny Bower (G) Bobby Hull (LW)
4 Jean-Guy Talbot (D) Gordie Howe (RW)
5 Gump Worsley (G) Andy Bathgate (RW)

Doug Harvey wins the seventh Norris trophy of his brilliant career, and finishes second in Hart voting.
The great Canadien defenseman fares relatively poorly in Point Allocation. As mentioned earlier, its
difficult to accurately measure defense in the Point Allocation system and unfortunately, excellent
defensive players like Harvey have very likely been underrated.

1963

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Glenn Hall (G) Gordie Howe (RW)
2 Gump Worsley (G) Stan Mikita (C)
3 Gordie Howe (RW) Terry Sawchuk (G)
4 Frank Mahovlich (LW) Glenn Hall (G)
5 Jacques Plante (G) Frank Mahovlich (LW)

Gordie Howe won the Hart and Art Ross trophy this season; its the sixth time he won each award. Point
Allocation agrees that Howe was the leagues best skater.

1964

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Glenn Hall (G) Jean Beliveau (C)
2 Bobby Hull (LW) Bobby Hull (LW)
3 Stan Mikita (C) Gordie Howe (RW)
4 Johnny Bower (G) Charlie Hodge (G)
5 Jean Beliveau (C) Stan Mikita (C)

Jean Beliveau wins his second Hart and, although its a strong season, Point Allocation sees the deadly
Hull-Mikita duo as superior they are the only two players to breach the eighty point barrier, and
played a significant amount on the leagues best team in Goal Prevention. I strongly suspect that Mikita
was the better of the two players in 1964 given that he is almost unanimously considered the superior
defensive player. However, since Point Allocation doesnt do a good job of differentiating the defensive
contribution of teammates, Hulls slim offensive advantage gets him the top ranking among skaters.
1965

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Roger Crozier (G) Bobby Hull (LW)
2 Norm Ullman (C) Norm Ullman (C)
3 Gordie Howe (RW) Gordie Howe (RW)
4 Stan Mikita (C) Roger Crozier (G)
5 Pierre Pilote (D) Charlie Hodge (G)

Pilote has the best season of his career, winning his third consecutive Norris trophy and finishing 8th in
scoring. Hull is a questionable Hart winner (ranking 7th among skaters in Point Allocation) as Ullman
scores more goals and assists, and plays in more games (which, based on how the methodology works,
gives him more defensive credit).

1966

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Glenn Hall (G) Bobby Hull (LW)
2 Bobby Hull (LW) Jean Beliveau (C)
3 Gump Worsley (G) Gordie Howe (RW)
4 Bobby Rousseau (RW) Glenn Hall (G)
5 Jean Beliveau (C) Norm Ullman (C)

Its no surprise that Hull wins the Hart trophy; he sets the single-season record for goals and points.
Point Allocation agrees that hes the leagues best skater. Seemingly out of nowhere, Bobby Rousseau
has a stunning season (tied for second in scoring); Point Allocation gives him credit for a fantastic season
but he only receives a smattering of votes for the Hart trophy, finishing just 16th overall. Perhaps voters
were reluctant to vote for a player who they suspected had a fluky career year?25

1967

Rank Point Allocation Hart Trophy

1 Eddie Giacomin (G) Stan Mikita (C)
2 Stan Mikita (C) Eddie Giacomin (G)
3 Bobby Hull (LW) Bobby Hull (LW)
4 Pierre Pilote (D) Henri Richard (C)
5 Kenny Wharram (RW) Harry Howell (D)

The Original Six era ends with a spectacular season from Mikita, one of the most well-rounded players in
hockey history. He sets the single-season scoring record (breaking his teammate Hulls record from the
previous season by one point). The Slovak-born centre wins the Hart trophy; Point Allocation agrees that
he was the leagues best skater.

25
I disagree with this philosophy. A player should be recognized for how well they played during the season in
question; expectations about future seasons are not relevant. If Stu Grimson somehow scored 120 points in 2000,
he should win the Hart on the basis of his performance that year, even if its clear that the season was a (massive,
astronomical) fluke.
Best forward each season Point Allocation versus forward leader in Hart trophy voting

Season PA leader Hart leader

1953 Gordie Howe Gordie Howe
1954 Gordie Howe Maurice Richard
1955 Bernie Geoffrion Ted Kennedy
1956 Jean Beliveau Jean Beliveau
1957 Gordie Howe Gordie Howe
1958 Dickie Moore Gordie Howe
1959 Dickie Moore Andy Bathgate
1960 Henri Richard Gordie Howe
1961 Bernie Geoffrion Bernie Geoffrion
1962 Bobby Hull Bobby Hull
1963 Gordie Howe Gordie Howe
1964 Bobby Hull Jean Beliveau
1965 Norm Ullman Bobby Hull
1966 Bobby Hull Bobby Hull
1967 Stan Mikita Stan Mikita

There isnt an award for best forward, so Ive compared the Point Allocation leader to the forward with
the highest ranking in Hart trophy voting. This is an imprecise comparison, but I thought it would be
interesting.

Point Allocation agrees with the highest-ranked forward in Hart voting eight times in fifteen years. Two
of the disagreements occur in 1954 and 1955 when, as Ive previously discussed, there were
questionable Hart trophy winners. Two other disagreements relate to Dickie Moore, who received
surprisingly little consideration for the Hart despite having a phenomenal peak in the late fifties.
Best defenseman each season Point Allocation versus Norris trophy winner

Season PA leader Norris winner

1953 Red Kelly Red Kelly26
1954 Red Kelly Red Kelly
1955 Red Kelly Doug Harvey
1956 Doug Harvey Doug Harvey
1957 Doug Harvey Doug Harvey
1958 Doug Harvey Doug Harvey
1959 Tom Johnson Tom Johnson
1960 Tim Horton Doug Harvey
1961 Allan Stanley Doug Harvey
1962 Jean-Guy Talbot Doug Harvey
1963 Tim Horton Pierre Pilote
1964 Pierre Pilote Pierre Pilote
1965 Pierre Pilote Pierre Pilote
1966 J.C. Tremblay Jacques Lapperiere
1967 Pierre Pilote Harry Howell

Point Allocation agrees with the Norris trophy winner eight times in fifteen years. Doug Harvey fares
much worse under Point Allocation compared to Norris voting (he loses four of his seven Norris
trophies), but Ive already discussed why any statistical system like Point Allocation would underrate
him. Tim Horton, a two-time runner-up in real life, is named best defenseman twice.

26
The Norris trophy was first awarded in 1954, however Red Kelly was the only defenseman unanimously selected
to the year-end all-star team. Thus, its reasonable to assume that he would have been the Norris trophy winner,
had that award existed at the time.
Best goalie each season Point Allocation versus first-team all-star27

Season PA leader First-team all-star

1953 James Henry Terry Sawchuk
1954 Terry Sawchuk Harry Lumley
1955 Harry Lumley Harry Lumley
1956 Jacques Plante Jacques Plante
1957 Glenn Hall Glenn Hall
1958 Jacques Plante Glenn Hall
1959 Jacques Plante Jacques Plante
1960 Johnny Bower Glenn Hall
1961 Glenn Hall Johnny Bower
1962 Jacques Plante Jacques Plante
1963 Glenn Hall Glenn Hall
1964 Glenn Hall Glenn Hall
1965 Roger Crozier Roger Crozier
1966 Glenn Hall Glenn Hall
1967 Ed Giacomin Ed Giacomin

Point Allocation agrees with the first-team all-star goalie ten times in fifteen years. Interestingly, during
the fifteen years Ive studied, the voters elected to the first all-star team the goalie with the lowest GAA
who played in at least 75% of their teams games28, with Glenn Hall being the sole exception to this
pattern.

27
As discussed earlier, we cant look at the Vezina trophy winner to determine the best goalie because, during the
Original Six era, the Vezina was a statistical award, essentially equal to the modern Jennings trophy. The first-team
all-star goalie was voted best netminder.
28
The Contrarian Goaltender, Don't Always Believe Your Lying Eyes.
http://brodeurisafraud.blogspot.ca/2009/09/dont-always-believe-your-lying-eyes.html