View Single Post
Old
04-19-2013, 08:29 PM
  #241
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 556
vCash: 500
A) In 1991, at age 30, Wayne Gretzky had a better season than Pavel Datsyuk has ever had, will ever have, or could dream of having.

B) R-on/off can be useful, but for everyone who says "let's not be too hard on Messier, he was competing with Gretzky," the inverse is true as well. Outscoring the Messier/Anderson line, or the Nicholls/Robitaille/Taylor line by a little is better than outscoring a Johan Franzen line by a lot.

Also let's not be suckers for +/-. Unless you want to say that Marty McSorley (+48) was better than Gretzky (+30) in 1991. Goals-Assists-Points are much better numbers to look at than Total Goals For.

C) For all the talk of Yzerman having a 90 point, 2nd team AS LW as a regular partner, perhaps we should remember that the Kings played their best ES players on the 2nd (non-Gretzky) line (Robitaille-Nicholls-Taylor). At ES, 88-89 Gretzky did play occasionally with Robitaille and Nicholls, but was mostly used on various line combos like Krushelnyski-Gretzky-Allison, with Tonelli, Carpenter, Liba and Kasper tossed in as well. The best two regular linemates were at 64 and 62 points.

But I'm sure when Gretzky scored 9 points on 11 Kings goals against the Flames in the Smythe Finals, everyone was clamoring for Ftorek to play Ron Duguay instead of that unreliable Gretzky...

D) Lemieux scoring on the powerplay is a good thing. But he didn't score 79 PP points because he scored at some inhuman rate, he got there because of the Pens high number of PPO. So if his lead over Gretzky and Yzerman is mostly because of a higher number of penalties in Pens games, I don't know how that makes Lemieux more valuable.

blogofmike is offline