HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Would Gretzy have made it as big in the 50's early 60's

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-18-2006, 11:48 PM
  #26
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
I think the game might have been easier for Gretzky to handle in the 50s and 60s. Gretzky has always been considered smallish in his era, but in the 50s and 60s, he would have been the same size or bigger than guys like Howe, Hull, Mikita, Richard, and other offensive stars from that era.
gretzy may have been bigger than Mikita & Henri Richard but was cetainly a lot slighter than Howe & most other players of that era. He certainly wasn't as tough as Howe, mikita, And henri richard. I really think he would have had a tough time finding the space that he had in the watered down 80's. He would have had to fight his own battles.

pappyline is offline  
Old
03-19-2006, 12:31 AM
  #27
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by murray
gretzy may have been bigger than Mikita & Henri Richard but was cetainly a lot slighter than Howe & most other players of that era. He certainly wasn't as tough as Howe, mikita, And henri richard. I really think he would have had a tough time finding the space that he had in the watered down 80's. He would have had to fight his own battles.
Trust me, if Gretzky could thrive in an era when the average player is 6'1"+, I'm sure he could have handled himself in a league of players around 5'10".

Stephen is offline  
Old
03-19-2006, 10:54 AM
  #28
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning
It would be amusing if not for the fact that you probably honestly believe it.

I guess the Isles weren`t trying to hit him in `84 and the Bruins weren`t trying to hit him in `88. Not sure what Arbour and O`Reilly`s reasons could possibly be, but I`m sure you`ll come up with something. It`s all a pro-Gretzky conspiracy. Don`t ever drop that torch chooch.
Its non believers like you who ruin things. But here is more :

" The defense team hired Dr. Bernard Diamond to examine Sirhan to ascertain his mental state, and to find out if Sirhan could be made to remember what happened under hypnosis. As soon as Diamond hypnotized Sirhan, he found that Sirhan was an exceedingly simple subject. In fact, Sirhan "went under" so quickly and so deeply that Diamond had to work to keep him conscious enough to respond. Kaiser recorded that the very first words that Sirhan spoke to Diamond when put under hypnosis were "I donít know any people. I am not involved. Who is Janet? " Such rapid induction generally indicates prior hypnosis.

The tapes of Diamondís hypnosis sessions reveal a man that sounds like he is more interested in implanting memories than recovering them. This has been well detailed in the literature elsewhere so I will not focus on it here. Diamond, however, argued against Kaiserís notion that Sirhan had been somehow hypnotically in the control of another, and claimed Sirhan had hypnotized himself. But self-hypnosis rarely (if ever) results in complete amnesia. In addition, Sirhan "blocked" when asked key questions under hypnosis, such as "Did you think this up all by yourself?Did Luc Robitaille have a bodyguard" (five second pause), and "Are you the only person involved in Kennedyís shooting?" (three second pause).26 In hypnosis, blocks are as important as answers, in that they can indicate some prior work in that area. Skilled hypnotists can place blocks into the subjectís mind that prevent memory of actions undertaken and associations made while under hypnosis.

....

An Arab doctor spoke Arabic to Sirhan, but obtained no response in recognition. Sheriff Pitchess would say of Sirhan that he was a "very unusual prisoner...a young man of apparently complete self-possession, totally unemotional. He wants to see what the papers have to say about him although he is fearful of hitting Gretzky because Eagleson, Zeigler are watching."28 At the station in the middle of a hot Los Angeles June night, Sirhan got the chills. He exhibited a similar reaction every time he came out of hypnosis from Diamond.

Sirhanís family and friends insisted that Sirhan had changed after a fall from a horse at a racetrack where he was working as an exercise jockey. One of his friends from the racetrack, Terry Welch, told the LAPD that Sirhan underwent a complete personality change; that he suddenly resented people with wealth, that he had become a loner. After the fall, Sirhan was treated by a series of doctors. Itís possible that one of these doctors saw Sirhan as a potential hypnosis subject, and started him down a path that would end at the Ambassador hotel. Curiously, renowned expert hypnotist Dr. George Estabrooks, used by the War Department after Pearl Harbor, suggested planting a "doctor" in a hospital who could employ hypnotism on patients.29

The strange notebook entries, if they were indeed written by Sirhan, show certain phrases repeated over and over, including "RFK must die" and "Pay to the order of". Other words that pop up with no explanation, scattered throughout the writing, are "drugs" and "mind control". Diamond once hypnotized Sirhan and asked him to write about Robert Kennedy. Out came "RFK must die RFK must die RFK must die" and "Robert Kennedy is going to die Robert Kennedy is going to die Robert is going to die." When asked who killed Kennedy, Sirhan wrote "I donít know I donít know I donít know."

Just hours after the assassination, famed hypnotist Dr. William Joseph Bryan was on the Ray Briem show for KABC radio, and mentioned offhandedly that Sirhan was likely operating under some form of posthypnotic suggestion. Curiously, in the SUS files there is an interview summary of Joan Simmons in which the following is listed:

Miss Simmons was program planner for a show on KABC radio and was contacted regarding allegations of Sirhan belonging to a secret hypnotic group. She stated that she knew nothing of a Doctor Bryant [sic] of the American Institute of Hypnosis or Hortence Farrchild. She was acquainted with Herb Elsman [the next few words are blacked out but appear to say "and considered him some right-wing extremist."]

Dr. Bryan was the President of the American Institute of Hypnosis, the headquarters of which were located on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. Bryan was famous for having hypnotized Albert De Salvo, the "Boston Strangler" and claimed to have discovered De Salvoís motive under hypnosis. There is good reason to doubt that De Salvo was in fact the killer, according to Susan Kelly in her recent, heavily documented book The Boston Stranglers.30 And if he was not, that throws a more sinister light on Bryanís overtly coercive involvement with De Salvo. Curiously, De Salvo was the topic of one of Sirhanís disjointed post-assassination ramblings at LAPD headquarters, and references to "Di Salvo" and appear in Sirhanís notebook."

chooch* is offline  
Old
03-19-2006, 02:38 PM
  #29
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by murray
gretzy may have been bigger than Mikita & Henri Richard but was cetainly a lot slighter than Howe & most other players of that era. He certainly wasn't as tough as Howe, mikita, And henri richard. I really think he would have had a tough time finding the space that he had in the watered down 80's. He would have had to fight his own battles.
I don't see it as a question of being able to stand up physically. I think any team that he was on would recognize what he had and put him in a position to succeed. Defenseman didn't hustle to fill passing lanes as trailers in the 50's, maybe they would have. Until Bobby Hull, players didn't cross the blueline and blast off the wing, certain talents just make the game different. In Gretzky's day, players didn't chase him for the big hit because when they left their position, the puck was moved to the open space. I know what you mean by players like Richard and Mikita making their space, I just think his talent and vision would make the difference. Before the player would return after pp goals, I would guess that some teams were reluctant to take penalties playing Mtl., wouldn't the same thing apply ? Then again, maybe not, we're playing what if after all.

mcphee is offline  
Old
03-19-2006, 02:50 PM
  #30
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee
I don't see it as a question of being able to stand up physically. I think any team that he was on would recognize what he had and put him in a position to succeed. Defenseman didn't hustle to fill passing lanes as trailers in the 50's, maybe they would have. Until Bobby Hull, players didn't cross the blueline and blast off the wing, certain talents just make the game different. In Gretzky's day, players didn't chase him for the big hit because when they left their position, the puck was moved to the open space. I know what you mean by players like Richard and Mikita making their space, I just think his talent and vision would make the difference. Before the player would return after pp goals, I would guess that some teams were reluctant to take penalties playing Mtl., wouldn't the same thing apply ? Then again, maybe not, we're playing what if after all.
Would Luc Robitaille have scored more goals than Hull in the 60's?

chooch* is offline  
Old
03-19-2006, 03:02 PM
  #31
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chooch
Would Luc Robitaille have scored more goals than Hull in the 60's?
I'm a bit slow Chooch, and I'm nervous around somebody who went deep into a Sirhan Sirhan rant for some weird hate for Gretzky fans.

Would Robitaille score more than Hull. Hard to say, Hull carried the play, he made end to end rushes, and often finished the rush. He was one of the guys who changed some of the ways the game was played. Robitalle, imo, was a finisher, pure shooter, could do nothing else. A great goal scorer, but not innovative. His points would have depended on his team situation I guess. Playing on Bobby Hull's line, he probably would have filled the net, he could have thrived alongside a playmaker like Mikita, who knows. A shooter's a shooter. I don't se relevance though. Robitaille is what he is, a finsher, who surprised everyone when he made it because he never seemed to skate well enough.

mcphee is offline  
Old
03-20-2006, 03:19 PM
  #32
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
One of the defining traits of all-time greats is their ability to excel in any era, in any style of play. I'm fully confident in Gretzky's ability to dominate any era. He may not have enjoyed 200-plus point seasons, but that's partly due to playing 10-14 fewer games per year, at a time when goal scoring hovered around modern levels. I still think an in-his-prime Gretzky scores 150-175 points per year playing in the late 1990s/first half of the 2000s.

Why is this? Because there has never been a smarter player than Gretzky. His ability to see and think the game is unparalleled. It almost seemed like he knew what an opponent was going to do before the opponent. So many of his goals stemmed from an ability to see the holes in the goaltender that nobody else could.

When you can see and think the game the way that Gretzky could, it gives you a considerable advantage. And contrary to what some will tell you, the mental/thinking/instinct aspects of the game are critical.

Others could skate, shoot and stickhandle better than Gretzky, but nobody could think like Gretzky. That's why he dominates/thrives/wins countless Art Ross trophies in the Original Six.

Gretzky is still the best offensive player ever if he comes along in the Original Six. Just like Gordie Howe is the best all-round forward ever if he comes along in the 1980s, Rocket Richard is the best big game player ever if he comes along in the 1980s, and Bobby Orr is the best player ever if he comes along in the 1930s.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
03-21-2006, 04:48 PM
  #34
flyin_finn
Fighter Jet Pilot
 
flyin_finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,034
vCash: 500
How many of the people have actually saw any games from the 50's or early 60's? I admit that I have not, just some highlights but you cannot determine much from that. Gretzky himself says that the players get better and better and you cannot compare different era's.

Would Gretzky have scored as much points with solid wood stick bareheaded as with ultra-light Easton and Jofa helmet? Are the games tougher because there are only six to half of the number of teams of today's expanded NHL?

Let's take a look on the scoring leaders from those era's:

In the 50's and 60's the Art Ross winners like Howe had typically less than 90 points per season in 70 games. Second best scorers averaged bit over a point per game. In the 1970's guys like Phil Esposito led scoring with 130-150 points. In the early to mid- 80's the second best scorers had similar numbers as Esposito. Those numbers did not apply to Gretzky, who dominated so that until late 80's he scored typically 40-75 or so points more than next best scorer.

For conclusion I would say that Gretzky would not scored as much in the 50's or 60's as the game was more low-scoring. But it is a safe bet that he would have exeeded 100 points even in those days.

flyin_finn is offline  
Old
03-21-2006, 07:50 PM
  #35
MacDaddy TLC*
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leafin La Vida Loca
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Gretzky would have been a dominant player if he had played in ANY era. Period.


Last edited by MacDaddy TLC*: 03-22-2006 at 08:46 AM.
MacDaddy TLC* is offline  
Old
03-21-2006, 09:58 PM
  #36
Habsfan 32
Registered User
 
Habsfan 32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Way up north...
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,319
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Habsfan 32 Send a message via MSN to Habsfan 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Loose Cannon
Gretaky would have been a dominant player if he had played in ANY era. Period.
I agree. Same thing with Orr,Lemieux and all the other greats in hockey.

Habsfan 32 is offline  
Old
03-26-2006, 01:05 AM
  #37
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by murray
In the 50's & early 60's, you had to be tough and you had no goons to protect you. Howe, richard, Hull, Orr all fought their own battles. Small guys like mikita and henri Richard fought their own battles & were effective players. Wayne certainly had the ability butdid he have the toughness to compete in that ere?
Gretzky would have dominated any era. So would Howe. The fact is, players like that were tremendously gifted and they would have been the best no matter when they played. There were tough players during all eras, goons certainly did not make Gretzky great - no matter what chooch likes to think.

Ogopogo* is offline  
Old
03-28-2006, 08:41 PM
  #38
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo
Gretzky would have dominated any era. So would Howe. The fact is, players like that were tremendously gifted and they would have been the best no matter when they played. There were tough players during all eras, goons certainly did not make Gretzky great - no matter what chooch likes to think.
Gretzky didnt even dominate his own era - its a myth perpetuated by uninitiated number crunchers. Messier was the dominant Oiler on a team which had a ridiculously easy ride to the Finals every year. And Trottier amongst many others were far superior players in that era. I actually saw the games and watched the East teams beat each other up every playoffs. And no - no one cared about 99's points or whatever the Oilers were up to against Chicago or Winterpeg or whatever. All Montreal cared about was beating Quebec and Boston.

In any case, when 66 stepped onto the ice for his first shift against Boston....

chooch* is offline  
Old
03-28-2006, 08:44 PM
  #39
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,826
vCash: 1650
Quote:
Originally Posted by chooch
Gretzky didnt even dominate his own era - its a myth perpetuated by uninitiated number crunchers. Messier was the dominant Oiler on a team which had a ridiculously easy ride to the Finals every year. And Trottier amongst many others were far superior players in that era. I actually saw the games and watched the East teams beat each other up every playoffs. And no - no one cared about 99's points or whatever the Oilers were up to against Chicago or Winterpeg or whatever. All Montreal cared about was beating Quebec and Boston.

In any case, when 66 stepped onto the ice for his first shift against Boston....

Absolutely correct. At the same time Doug Crossman was the dominant force in the east.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
03-28-2006, 08:52 PM
  #40
chooch*
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Bucky
Absolutely correct. At the same time Doug Crossman was the dominant force in the east.
Dr. Charlie Huddy, Dr. Lee Fogolin, Dr. Marty McSorley, Dr. Don Jackson, Dr. Paul Coffey, Dr Kevin Lowe and Randy Gregg.

Quite a Defence for a dynasty. Whats scary is that they were the best in their Conference.

chooch* is offline  
Old
03-28-2006, 08:55 PM
  #41
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,826
vCash: 1650
Quote:
Originally Posted by chooch
Dr. Charlie Huddy, Dr. Lee Fogolin, Dr. Marty McSorley, Dr. Don Jackson, Dr. Paul Coffey and Randy Gregg.

Quite a Defence for a "dynasty".

Last I recall it don't make much difference how you got there when they're lifting the banner.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
03-29-2006, 09:24 PM
  #42
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chooch
Gretzky didnt even dominate his own era - its a myth perpetuated by uninitiated number crunchers. Messier was the dominant Oiler on a team which had a ridiculously easy ride to the Finals every year. And Trottier amongst many others were far superior players in that era. I actually saw the games and watched the East teams beat each other up every playoffs. And no - no one cared about 99's points or whatever the Oilers were up to against Chicago or Winterpeg or whatever. All Montreal cared about was beating Quebec and Boston.

In any case, when 66 stepped onto the ice for his first shift against Boston....
You are correct hockey guru, IIRC it was a young stud by the name of Dan Daoust dominating the 80s,

Ogopogo* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.