Talk:List of NHL players with 1000 points

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ice Hockey (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

Stan Mikita[edit]

Mind giving a link to where on Mikita's described as a Slovakian? I just went through the search function on the site and see nothing of the sort. Mikita was born in Slovakia, but emigrated to Canada when he was eight, is a Canadian citizen, and played internationally for Canada. He strikes me as Slovakian the same way that Ken Hodge and Steve Thomas were English players, Willi Plett Paraguayan and Rod Langway was Taiwanese. Ravenswing 21:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's a better link:
Hockey Hall of Fame has him as Slovakia's all-time leading scorer. (and Steve Thomas as Englands, Rod Langway as Taiwans). Yankees76 21:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC) link (bottom of page -::Jagr's goal was the 541st of his career, tying him for second place with Stan Mikita on the all-time list for goals scored in the NHL by a European. Jari Kurri is the leader with 601.
Lastly, Stan Mikita holds the state honour of White double-cross, second class in Slovakia and is a member of the Slovak Hall of Fame.

I'll leave the Canadian flag next to Mikita - as he did reach the 1000 point mark as a Canadian citizen - however it might be a good idea to create a policy regarding player nationality and how to determine it for future edits. Cheers! Yankees76 04:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Just an FYI, I didn't change the flag back again as a sockpuppet - is a Netherlands IP (just in case anyone thought I might be trying to sneak the change back in. I haven't reverted it yet (as you know my position on the subject). Cheers Yankees76 23:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


I just removed the flags that Elrith had put in a few months ago for several reasons.

  1. There are arguments about player's nationalities, see above argument.
  2. They slowed down the speed in which the page loaded, because of all the images.
  3. They serve very little purpose in the context of the article, unlike the team logos which identify visually what team the player was with at the time, the nationality is irrelevant info involving this topic.
  • Qualms? I have qualms. If the content is verifiable it should be here. BoojiBoy 03:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • No qualms. And based on this edit it looks like someone already fixed it. — MrDolomite | Talk 15:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I still think we need to come to a consensus of whether the flag should indicate the players birth country, country of residence or country of citizenship. For example, Brett Hull has an American flag, but he was born in Canada and has dual US/Canadian citizenship. Stan Mikita was born in Slovakia, was raised in Canada and is now an American. Peter Stastny was born in Slovkia, but played internationally for Czechoslovakia, Slovkia and Canada, and also has dual US/Canadian citizenship (as does Gretzky - though no one will argue that he's American) And, Russian players like Fedorov and Mogilny were born in the Soviet Union, so if the flag goes by birth place, the wrong flag is listed. Until a consensus is reached I would remove the flags - as they don't really serve an immediate purpose. Yankees76 16:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Brett Hull was also raised in and started playing in Canada, and his famous father was Canadian. That basically makes him like 3x as Canadian as he is American. PublicSecrecy 05:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hall of Fame Addition to the Table?[edit]

There are many who debate whether inclusion in this club should mean Hall of Fame election. Adding whether a player is in the Hockey Hall of Fame would be a good addition to the table as it would make a a good resource for this dicussion and is verifiable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Waltgerris (talkcontribs) 17:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC).

I disagree. Many on the list are still active players, and achieving 1000 points does not guarantee an induction. -- Scorpion 17:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I also disagree, whether the player was in the HHOF has little relevance to this article, as 1000 points and HHOF do not have any correlation. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 18:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
First off, who would be that "many?" Secondly, with the post-WHA explosion in career lengths, 1000 points is just not that big a deal; you can get there averaging 65 pts a season for 15 years, both marks far from remarkable and certainly not representative of all-time greatness. Thirdly, there are just too many 1000-pt scorers, and the HHOF elects no more than three players a year and nowhere near that many consistently. Right now there are about twenty players on that list who just aren't going to make it, ever: the Propps, Hunters, Fleurys, Verbeeks, Andersons, Larmers and Smiths of the world are SOL. More will break 1000 in the upcoming seasons: I'd say barring injury or ennui Tkachuk, Bondra, Weight, Forsberg, Lindros, Lidstrom and Kariya will hit it within 3-4 seasons. Ravenswing 18:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I hope you are not implying that Forsberg or Lidstrom will not be inducted. − Twas Now ( talkcontribse-mail ) 03:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I think it is valid that the HHOF column *should* be added. Every year before the selection is made, I am reminded of who is missing and the always interesting debate about who should be in and who shouldn't. I am also a baseball fan and the statistical analysis that helps fuel those debates is endless (and endless interesting). Although it is impossible to compare different eras in hockey, you can do comparisons of modern-day numbers. For instance, Cam Neely's inclusion into the HHOF vs. Dino Ciccarelli's omission with almost as many goals (608) as Neely's points (694) (regardless of the 'real' reason Dino isn't in). Being from Toronto, there was discussion about Doug Gilmour's chances next year (as this year was 'full' with superb 1st ballad Messier, MacInnis, Stevens and Francis) and him being the 2nd most points in NHL history without being in the HHbOF. Additionally, by use of the sortable table, you can see that Adam Oates is 6th in assists and not in the HHOF. Surely that will be corrected at some point. Overall though, I think you can't talk about scoring 1000 points in the NHL and *not* think that at least you be given careful consideration of being in the HHOF. Sometimes it will be obvious - Bourque - and sometimes not - Propp. Anyway, I've put in a column and I hope that wasn't presumptuous of me. Please feel free to revert my edits if you like... - Eric Peebles (talk) 09:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


Why is this list by date and not by points? Otherwise I suggest a move of title. I also think people are interested in seeing rankings by points than dates, or revise why its ranked 1 - ?? if its just by date and there is no 'rank' per say. Just a chronological list which doesnt need numbers. Mkdwtalk 10:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Because that list already exists. Ravenswing 13:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Table - sortable by date doesn't work[edit]

I'm a huge fan of sortable tables as it gives the user/reader the ability to analysis the data according to the column titles. However, currently the "Date" column is being sorted alphabetically (i.e. April 3 is first) rather than by date (Howe's November 1960). I know that you can 'force' the dates to be in order by using the number order column (far left column), but shouldn't the "Date" column sort by date? Just wondering. - Eric Peebles (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with updating stats midseason?[edit]

Based on the fact that said updates get deleted extemely quickly, it seems you people have a problem with it. I don't see any sort of problem, and in fact it makes more sense to me if the stats are constantly updated. So why do you leave them until the end of the season? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

See the instructions at the beginning of the list. I agree it's pointless to update and compare career numbers on a game by game basis.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

HHoF column[edit]

The HHoF column is very wide, mostly because of a couple players still playing in other leagues. Although we could force it to have a more narrow width, I'd rather see the "in other leagues" replaced with an asterisk as used in other NHL pages. Although it would be somewhat inconsistent with the other NHL pages, I'd like the asterisk after the "still active" rather than the player's name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Retirement Dates added to the List?[edit]

I really enjoy this list and wonder if we could add a column for Retirement Dates. It would be nice to have that additional info when discussing older players' merits for being in the HHOF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


I just don't understand what's wrong with adding Whitney - it feels like by leaving him in the second list we're partially denying the fact that he acheived the milestone. Last year, we had four, and we added them but left the statistics blank, which seemed to be a reasonable compromise. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:07, 1 April 2012 (UTC).

I disagree that not having Whitney in a list of players who achieved the milestone prior to the current season is denying the fact that he achieved it this season. It's mentioned very soon afterwards. That said, I have no objections to adding him to the list on two conditions; no misleading statistics and information in opening paragraphs should be appropriately updated to be consistent with the list. Given that there's only one week left in the current season, I think it would be simplest to wait. Disclosure, I removed Whitney from list as well as initiated the blanking mid last season rather than remove the players. Looking back I regret that the opening paragraphs were not updated. (talk) 19:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Those two conditions should be easy enough to meet. The blank statistics was a nice compromise, and I think all we need is to make it clear that the statistics for all the players are as of the start of the season, and have him on the list with no stats. I think we should at least set a precedent - if Whitney had gotten 1000 in October, rather than April, there'd be no way anyone would stand for leaving him off the list. (talk) 22:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Now we have a similar case with Martin St. Louis, and it's November. Any reason not to move him? Also, it appears that Daniel Alfredsson is now retired. Brettalan (talk) 22:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)