HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   National Hockey League Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=60)
-   -   Would Gretzky still be called the "Great One" if... (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=17190)

Spaceace 10-05-2003 01:03 PM

Would Gretzky still be called the "Great One" if...
 
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller. Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

Vagrant 10-05-2003 01:05 PM

It's up for debate but everything is. If Gretzky would have been born 10 years later maybe he would have been 3 or 4 inches taller. There are too many variables to even consider when discussing something like this. You'd have to get into who his linemates are and all that nonsense. I say just let sleeping dogs lie. ;)

Epsilon 10-05-2003 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller?? Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

Consider how well an aging, oft-injured Lemieux has done, and I think Gretz in his prime, playing today, would be easily good for 150+ points in an 80 game season.

canucksfan 10-05-2003 01:25 PM

I think Greztky in his prime could easily play in today's NHL. He was just that good.

Trottier 10-05-2003 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
...and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better.

Enter Dale Purinton, and many many more examples. There were stiffs, of course, in #99's day, as well, but it's a misnomer to automatically equate better physical specimens with better players.

Just my opinion.

Son of Steinbrenner 10-05-2003 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller. Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

wow a needless cheap shot at the rangers on hockeys future!! there is something new :rolleyes:

Team_Spirit 10-05-2003 02:08 PM

Yeah sure , but forget those 200+ pts seasons ;)

#37-#93-#27* 10-05-2003 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller. Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

When's the last time the Blues won a cup? :)

Habs4ever 10-05-2003 02:17 PM

How do you know???
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jozeph_Balej
Yeah sure , but forget those 200+ pts seasons ;)


Are you telepathic he was great one when he played tell me one player right now way ahead of everybody else, it was one of those great NHL moments when he played those 200 plus point seasons, just because NHL doesn't have ultimate star doesn't mean no one can come out, right now we have many 50 goal scorers but thats all we have, I'm hoping NHL can see someone like him in near future, wouldn't you want to see legend play live??.

Kritty 10-05-2003 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller. Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

It would make no difference what style of NHL that he played in, Gretzky would be the scoring leader. He was just that good. He could probably lace them up at his age now and be very productive. Good players find a way to get their points, Gretzky was the greatest player so just imagine what he could do.

temporary pencil 10-05-2003 02:26 PM

If you take a 24 years old Wayne Gretzky in top shape and put him on a team like Colorado in today's NHL he'd score around 140 points per season... which is more than enough to crush everyone else in the scoring race.

Yes, I know, that's about 60 less than his average in the early 80s but don't forget how better the defense is today and also the goaltenders. There is just no comparison between today's goaltending and back then's goaltending, be it skill, athletism, equipment, etc. When you watch some of those old tapes it's just amazing how much net there was to shoot at compared to today.

JDB3939 10-05-2003 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epsilon
Consider how well an aging, oft-injured Lemieux has done, and I think Gretz in his prime, playing today, would be easily good for 150+ points in an 80 game season.

Just for comparisons sake, how do you think Lemieux in his prime without the injuries does in today's NHL?

Tacks 10-05-2003 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by weight39
He played in today's NHL?? He played in the "age of offense" and the players were smaller. Today the emphasis is on strong defense,except for the Rangers :D , and the players are a lot bigger,especially the d-men.

I think it was JCD who posted that Gretzky's numbers were not the result of playing during that time. I wish I had saved the post, it was a good one. Hosted the goals/game average before, during, and after Gretzky's career. He said that the GPG now is very similar to the numbers before Gretzky. There was a lot more to it and I'm probably not doing it any justice. I think he concluded saying that the high scoring era of the 80s and early 90s was because of Gretzky, not the other way around.

Also with medicine and regimes, he'd (everyone really) have that to take advantage of. I think Gretzky would do just as well, and maybe even produce at a high clip for a longer amount of time.

Yayo 10-05-2003 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDB3939
Just for comparisons sake, how do you think Lemieux in his prime without the injuries does in today's NHL?

If Mario today was playing in his prime, without injuries and on a team that has sufficent talent (not too stacked up front like Dallas or Ottawa and with better talent than a team like Pittsburgh, although it probably would not matter that much, and Ovechkin will be playing for them soon anyway), I think he could score around 125-135 points.

canucksfan 10-05-2003 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDB3939
Just for comparisons sake, how do you think Lemieux in his prime without the injuries does in today's NHL?

I think Lemieux on a decent team and without injuries could easily get between 140-150 points.

monster_bertuzzi 10-05-2003 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by canucksfan
I think Greztky in his prime could easily play in today's NHL. He was just that good.

I've never heard anyone point out the obvious more.

Team_Spirit 10-05-2003 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Habs4ever
Are you telepathic he was great one when he played tell me one player right now way ahead of everybody else, it was one of those great NHL moments when he played those 200 plus point seasons, just because NHL doesn't have ultimate star doesn't mean no one can come out, right now we have many 50 goal scorers but thats all we have, I'm hoping NHL can see someone like him in near future, wouldn't you want to see legend play live??.


We have many 50 goal scorer ? hah , Hedjuk .... .... ... from Forsberg .

Anyways no one will ever score 200pts in todays NHL .

Luigi Lemieux 10-05-2003 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Man
If Mario today was playing in his prime, without injuries and on a team that has sufficent talent (not too stacked up front like Dallas or Ottawa and with better talent than a team like Pittsburgh, although it probably would not matter that much, and Ovechkin will be playing for them soon anyway), I think he could score around 125-135 points.

I'd say a healthy lemieux in his prime gets 150 pts minimum. Let's not forget a past his prime lemieux scored 161 pts in '96.

Luigi Lemieux 10-05-2003 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jozeph_Balej
We have many 50 goal scorer ? hah , Hedjuk .... .... ... from Forsberg .

Anyways no one will ever score 200pts in todays NHL .

Never say never. A special player can do it i think. Again, in '96, Lemieux had 100 pts through the first 38 games.

JDB3939 10-05-2003 03:10 PM

Until injuries set in last year and linemates were injured or traded Lemieux was on pace for over 175 points through January or December.

Team_Spirit 10-05-2003 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Metamorphosis
Never say never. A special player can do it i think. Again, in '96, Lemieux had 100 pts through the first 38 games.

The same year they had 4 100pts man ?

BabyJagrov 10-05-2003 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Man
If Mario today was playing in his prime, without injuries and on a team that has sufficent talent (not too stacked up front like Dallas or Ottawa and with better talent than a team like Pittsburgh, although it probably would not matter that much, and Ovechkin will be playing for them soon anyway), I think he could score around 125-135 points.


An old Mario Lemieux with almost AHL-caliber linemates all year was on pace to score about 120 points last season !

So a healty one with good linemates would put much more than 125 points...

:teach:

temporary pencil 10-05-2003 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tacks
I think it was JCD who posted that Gretzky's numbers were not the result of playing during that time. I wish I had saved the post, it was a good one. Hosted the goals/game average before, during, and after Gretzky's career. He said that the GPG now is very similar to the numbers before Gretzky. There was a lot more to it and I'm probably not doing it any justice. I think he concluded saying that the high scoring era of the 80s and early 90s was because of Gretzky, not the other way around.

Also with medicine and regimes, he'd (everyone really) have that to take advantage of. I think Gretzky would do just as well, and maybe even produce at a high clip for a longer amount of time.

Numbers aren't everything!

Players today are better athletes than they used to be. Just look at an NHL player's training schedule. NHL players from the 70s and before were nowhere near what they are today... just look at some old tapes from that time--the difference is very obvious.

And--obviously, goaltenders. Not only is their equipment much bigger, but it's also a lot lighter and easier to move around with. Goaltending techniques have evolved beyond comparison and the goaltenders themselves are much better athletes.

If you take for example Joe Thornton in his current state with and you throw him in a 72 Boston Bruins time warp he'd easily score over 130 points, maybe even 150.

In the same way, I don't think a player like Guy Lafleur or Marcel Dionne would ever hit 100 points in today's NHL. They were gritty players with heart bigger than the rink, but if you look at them in terms of pure ability--speed, strenght, power, stamina, reaction time, etc, they would struggle a lot. The game is so much faster today, the hits are more powerful, the shots are harder, the players are stronger, faster, better trained, etc. Not to mention the closed up defensive systems that take monsters to get around.

The numbers themselves don't tell the whole story at all.

Taking all that into consideration, scoring 150 points today would be an absolutely out of this world accomplishment. Guys like Forsberg and Thornton who seem to be almost at the limit of what a human being can possibly be as a hockey player are not able to touch that mark.

Saying Wayne Gretzky could hit it today is an incredible compliment, and probably possible too considering the inhuman about of skill he had. But 200? Today? No way.

temporary pencil 10-05-2003 04:29 PM

And to answer the "Would Gretzky still be called the "Great One" if..." question, the answer is yes.

loveshack2 10-05-2003 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporary pencil
If you take for example Joe Thornton in his current state with and you throw him in a 72 Boston Bruins time warp he'd easily score over 130 points, maybe even 150.

In the same way, I don't think a player like Guy Lafleur or Marcel Dionne would ever hit 100 points in today's NHL. They were gritty players with heart bigger than the rink, but if you look at them in terms of pure ability--speed, strenght, power, stamina, reaction time, etc, they would struggle a lot. The game is so much faster today, the hits are more powerful, the shots are harder, the players are stronger, faster, better trained, etc. Not to mention the closed up defensive systems that take monsters to get around.


I think if you took Lafleur or Dionne and subjected them to same training schedule, equiptment, nutrition, and supplements that todays athletes have, they'd do just fine. Similarly if Thorton had the training schedule of a hockey player from the 70's (that is, almost none) he would still be good, but not as dominant as you think.

I agree with you that the game is faster and players are bigger and stronger and have better reaction times, but that is largely due to the better science of today both biological and technological, as well as the year round dedication of todays athletes IMHO. Today's athletes do not have more "pure ability" than the oldies, they're just in better shape and have better equiptment.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.