HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky? Will we know it?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-05-2013, 11:09 PM
  #401
bambamcam4ever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Maybe my figures are wrong.

Crosby played for 41 games, where the team scored 132 goals. Pittsburgh scored 238goals over the 82-game span. That implies that in the other 41 games, they scored 106 total goals, which is 2.585 goals per game.

Am I doing something wrong?
The 132 goals with Crosby is not including shootout wins. The 238 goals for the entire is counting them. The Penguins had 10 SO wins that year so subtract 10 from their totals.

bambamcam4ever is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:12 PM
  #402
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
The 132 goals with Crosby is not including shootout wins. The 238 goals for the entire is counting them. The Penguins had 10 SO wins that year so subtract 10 from their totals.
Strange that ESPN would include shootouts goals....

That makes a little more sense. Crosby improved his team's offense by 38%....which is getting very close to the Lemieux area. Moreover, this means that if Crosby had been out the full year, Pittsburgh would have had around 185 goals for the entire year, which would make them second-worst in the league...I could definitely see that, considering the quality of forwards they had outside of Crosby and Malkin...

Again, however, Lemieux was 35, not in his prime like Crosby. Though the injury excuse has to be a wash...


Last edited by OrrNumber4: 03-05-2013 at 11:18 PM.
OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:18 PM
  #403
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,588
vCash: 500
I just don't get it: The guy wins 9 MVPs in 10 years (including 8 straight), would have won 10 in 10 if not for missing 16 games in 1987-88; he is the fastest to 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800 goals, and the only one to 894; you take away all of them, and he is still the all time leading scorer; he takes his team to the Cup finals 56% of the time during his time with the Oilers (he wins 4 of them); he averages almost 190 points a season until he is traded -- when no one else has ever gotten more than that many points in a season more than once; he has the top 4 points seasons of all time, the top 11 assist seasons of all time, the top 2 goal seasons of all time, and the top 2 PPG average seasons of all time; he breaks every important offensive record, regular season, playoff season, as well as career - regular season and playoffs, finishing with 61 official records and over 100 unofficial records -- and people are still questioning him, as if none of this was enough to score 50 goals and 100 assists in today's NHL? I mean, what does the guy have to do?!! If he had scored 300 points, won the Hart every single year even in his 30s instead of just his 20s, and finished with 400 records....would we still be questioning? I have to say, probably so....

tazzy19 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:23 PM
  #404
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzy19 View Post
I just don't get it: The guy wins 9 MVPs in 10 years (including 8 straight), would have won 10 in 10 if not for missing 16 games in 1987-88; he is the fastest to 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800 goals, and the only one to 894; you take away all of them, and he is still the all time leading scorer; he takes his team to the Cup finals 56% of the time during his time with the Oilers (he wins 4 of them); he averages almost 190 points a season until he is traded -- when no one else has ever gotten more than that many points in a season more than once; he breaks every important offensive record, regular season, playoff season, as well as career - regular season and playoffs, finishing with 61 official records and over 100 unofficial records -- and people are still questioning him, as if none of this was enough to score 50 goals and 100 assists in today's NHL? I mean, what does the guy have to do?!! If he had scored 300 points, won the Hart every single year even in his 30s instead of just his 20s, and finished with 400 records....would we still be questioning? I have to say, probably so....
Personally, I feel that Lemieux's return should put to bed these ideas. The guy scored at a 140+ pace while well past his prime....and while his team was good, they definitely weren't one of the elite teams of the league even pre-Lemieux...

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:25 PM
  #405
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
You didn't read my post on Stastny and Bossy very well did you?

Go back and read it before you come up with conclusions around it.
Actually, you didn't really answer the question.


Simple question:

Where would Bossy and Stastny finish among scorers today?

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 02:00 AM
  #406
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Wouldn't Sid's 31% be worth more, relatively speaking in a lower scoring league than a higher scoring one overall?

Maybe not, I'm tired math hurts my head on the best of days...lol
Let me try and demonstrate it another way.

Previously, we were being a little generous to Crosby with the extrapolations (and using a year where he an an abnormally high contribution to his team's offense; I'd wager that he settles at around 45% of his team's scoring). So, let us just say that both Lemieux and Crosby score on 50% of the team's goals. However, we've established that Lemieux would increase his team's scoring by about 43% vs. 37.5%. So Lemieux is going to generate about 15% more offense for his team.

Other have mentioned that Crosby could get 130 points. That would mean that Lemieux gets around 149...and again, that is Lemieux not at all in the prime of his career. So it is very reasonable to think that Lemieux or Gretzky could get 160 or even up to 180 in the prime of their careers.

Even if you say that "oh no, Crosby really is a 50% kind of player" or "43 vs 37 is just noise, they are about the same", you at best could argue that Lemieux would be a ~130-140ish player in today's league...and that is an over-the-hill Lemieux well past his prime.

Now, of course you can alway say "we'll never know for sure". Of course we won't know for sure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try...and personally, I feel the above analysis gives fairly strong evidence that Lemieux and Gretzky would be very dominant players today.

Side note:
Defensively, Crosby looks decent.

In games he played, Pittsburgh was scored upon 94 times (EV and special team). For the year, the Penguins conceded 196 goals. So when Crosby was on the ice, the team conceded at a rate of 2.3 goals/game, vs. 2.5 goals/game when he wasn't on the ice. That is very close to statistical noise (6%).

Approximating for the removal of shorthanded goals, one could then say that Pittsburgh allows 10% fewer goals when Crosby is on the ice, which is better.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 03:23 PM
  #407
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Actually, you didn't really answer the question.


Simple question:

Where would Bossy and Stastny finish among scorers today?
This is actually a little difficult to answer. From the stats, it looks like both would be about as productive as Crosby offensively, but we know that Crosby is better defensively. I doubt Bossy and Statsny could play better defensively without their offense suffering.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 05:54 PM
  #408
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
This is actually a little difficult to answer. From the stats, it looks like both would be about as productive as Crosby offensively, but we know that Crosby is better defensively. I doubt Bossy and Statsny could play better defensively without their offense suffering.
First off, Crosby is NOT a defensive juggernaut. He is NOT in the same class as Toews and especially Dats defensively.
This is something that seems to be growing more and more exaggerated as this thread moves forward.
Sid is defensively responsible, a decent 2-way player but that's as far as it goes. He does NOT excel at defense.

I would have no problem conceding that Sid is more defensively responsible than Stastny was but Bossy...I don't think so.
That entire Isles dynasty took great pride in their defensive assignments, Bossy included.

The argument that Gretzky was not very good defensively is lame. Sure, in the regular season, those Oiler teams could give 2 ***** about defense but come playoff time, they learned he hard way that offense only takes you so far.
And I'm sorry but Gretzky in the playoffs, playing defensively responsible, did NOT see his production drop very much and certainly not by the degree that some in this thread seem to attribute to playing a more 2-way game.

I dare anyone to watch any of Gretzky's PO games post '83 or any of his Canada Cup games and come back and say he was ignoring his defensive responsibilities.
I will call bull**** faster than you can spit

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 06:01 PM
  #409
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
First off, Crosby is NOT a defensive juggernaut. He is NOT in the same class as Toews and especially Dats defensively.
This is something that seems to be growing more and more exaggerated as this thread moves forward.
Sid is defensively responsible, a decent 2-way player but that's as far as it goes. He does NOT excel at defense.
I'm going to agree that Toews and Datsyuk deserve higher praise for their defense than Crosby (maybe even a lot more, because of how much credit I give to anyone who is even noticeably better than Crosby defensively), but I'm pretty sure I can't agree with him being simply "defensively responsible". He just does too many of the little things better than 90% of all players out there on the defensive side of the puck alone, has great body positioning/control, and simply reads the play way too well to be considered in the group below those who "excel at defense". I'll offer that I consider his decision-making/risk-taking (relative to Toews/Datsyuk, of course), despite the relatively few times it actually works against him, enough to slot him in just below those two.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 06:19 PM
  #410
ITM
Registered User
 
ITM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 941
vCash: 500
One way to measure Gretzky's (and Lemeiux's) greatness is relative to their peers. Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky? is a little less piercing than, Will we ever see a player better than his contemporaries the way Gretzky was in his heyday? And I think the safe bet is to answer no.

60+ records that in some cases broke 30+ year old records and which still stand 30 years later. The differential in points from one GOAT to Gretzky is also anomalous. That Messier stands so close to Gretzky is in no small part Messier's own achievement...But there's an argument that suggests the second greatest point producer in the game wouldn't be there had he not stood so close to the greatest.

I think Pavel Datsyuk is the greatest talent since Jagr, who with Fedorov was the greatest since Lemeiux and he since Gretzky...but I think Datsyuk distinguishes in an exceptional way like perhaps only Fedorov (and Gilmour for a season or two) had.

But in terms of such a clear separation in production, I don't think we will ever see Gretzky's like again.

ITM is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 07:20 PM
  #411
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I'm going to agree that Toews and Datsyuk deserve higher praise for their defense than Crosby (maybe even a lot more, because of how much credit I give to anyone who is even noticeably better than Crosby defensively), but I'm pretty sure I can't agree with him being simply "defensively responsible". He just does too many of the little things better than 90% of all players out there on the defensive side of the puck alone, has great body positioning/control, and simply reads the play way too well to be considered in the group below those who "excel at defense". I'll offer that I consider his decision-making/risk-taking (relative to Toews/Datsyuk, of course), despite the relatively few times it actually works against him, enough to slot him in just below those two.
And you honestly believe Crosby is better at "reading plays/knowing the flow of the game" better than Gretzky?

Reality check.


And "90% of all players out there" is total exaggeration.
I have seen absolutely nothing on the defensive side of thing to put him up with a Lindros or a Forsberg or even a Sakic.

Seriously, the "new" Kovalchuk plays a sounder defensive game than Crosby does. No joke, he was damned impressive defensively last spring.
Crosby and his Pens were absolutely and most definitely not!


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 03-06-2013 at 07:35 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 07:44 PM
  #412
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
And you honestly believe Crosby is better at "reading plays/knowing the flow of the game" better than Gretzky?

Reality check.
Woah, woah, what?? I only compared him to Toews and Datsyuk, and I put him below them at that.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 08:35 PM
  #413
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanwb View Post
It's ok I don't need a hint. Gretzky would transcend eras is your basic point right? I agree with you in principle.

But while I understand where you are coming from, but I just don't see it happening in a similar fashion as it actually did. Too many good players now. Too much parity. There are no "Mickey Mouse Organizations" anymore. Any NHL team can beat any other NHL team on any given night because the offensive game has been dulled down and overcoached almost to death. Gretzky doesn't get 8 point games too often nowadays. Sure he might get a couple in his career, but the goaltenders are so much better. No way he scores 50 in 39. Almost everyone in the league is as good a skater as the best were back then. (There are a few obvious exceptions on both ends) If we give Gretzky the same benefits afforded to everyone else then it obviously gets interesting, but I believe my point would stand.

This is why I hate comparing eras. It makes things way too difficult. I do believe Gretzky would flat out dominate in a way that would put Crosby to shame, but because of a lot of these changes, I just don't see that amounting to 200 points in 2013.

Clearly the best player in the league? Definitely, but his stats are not nearly as impressive as they were, because whether you think so or not, the 80s were the perfect time for a guy like Gretzky to come along. His domination nowadays would be on the same level on a game to game or shift to shift basis, but it would just be much more subdued statistically IMO.
I've always had the theory that the 1980s were a product of Gretzky, not the other way around. The NHL likes to play copycat and once the Oilers had some success other teams copied this trend. Only until 1995 and 1996 when trap happy teams started winning did this change. Gretzky literally changed the mindset of OTHER NHL teams.

I think you have to realize that there are some lousy teams out there today as well. Columbus has always been lousy. Florida too. Teams like this on the surface have more points than the worst back in the 1980s but how much of that is because of the shootout and the extra point? In 1984 the Hartford Whalers beat Edmonton 11-0. Who would have predicted that? I guess what I am saying is that lousy teams have always been able to beat the best teams on any given night. This is sports, anything is possible. Nothing has changed.

Look, I was watching a Legends of Hockey video the other night and they were profiling Jean Beliveau. It is an old interview. Ted Lindsay said: "To me he is the best center that ever lived. This isn't disregarding Lemieux or Gretzky, but he played at a time when checking was tough, when guys knew HOW to body check and you took your man." Exact quote. The word in capitals is the word Lindsay emphasized. So what does this mean? It means that whether it is a previous era questioning the current one or the current one questioning the previous one it is always the same conclusion, MY era wins out. The only thing is, both parties are wrong. Gretzky would have been a star in any era he played in. He was questioned in his OWN era. Bobby Clarke said Gretzky wouldn't "last" in the NHL. What you are doing is nothing new, it is just something that has been going on for decades. It is more or less an idea of "If I can't see it happen with my own eyes today, then it wouldn't happen." I am afraid a prime Gretzky would just embarass the NHL all over again today.

Big Phil is online now  
Old
03-06-2013, 08:41 PM
  #414
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I've always had the theory that the 1980s were a product of Gretzky, not the other way around. The NHL likes to play copycat and once the Oilers had some success other teams copied this trend. Only until 1995 and 1996 when trap happy teams started winning did this change. Gretzky literally changed the mindset of OTHER NHL teams.

I think you have to realize that there are some lousy teams out there today as well. Columbus has always been lousy. Florida too. Teams like this on the surface have more points than the worst back in the 1980s but how much of that is because of the shootout and the extra point? In 1984 the Hartford Whalers beat Edmonton 11-0. Who would have predicted that? I guess what I am saying is that lousy teams have always been able to beat the best teams on any given night. This is sports, anything is possible. Nothing has changed.

Look, I was watching a Legends of Hockey video the other night and they were profiling Jean Beliveau. It is an old interview. Ted Lindsay said: "To me he is the best center that ever lived. This isn't disregarding Lemieux or Gretzky, but he played at a time when checking was tough, when guys knew HOW to body check and you took your man." Exact quote. The word in capitals is the word Lindsay emphasized. So what does this mean? It means that whether it is a previous era questioning the current one or the current one questioning the previous one it is always the same conclusion, MY era wins out. The only thing is, both parties are wrong. Gretzky would have been a star in any era he played in. He was questioned in his OWN era. Bobby Clarke said Gretzky wouldn't "last" in the NHL. What you are doing is nothing new, it is just something that has been going on for decades. It is more or less an idea of "If I can't see it happen with my own eyes today, then it wouldn't happen." I am afraid a prime Gretzky would just embarass the NHL all over again today.
Beautiful post!

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:42 PM
  #415
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Actually, you didn't really answer the question.


Simple question:

Where would Bossy and Stastny finish among scorers today?
Some where between 1st and last.

Seriously i gave a pretty detailed opinion of how they compared to today's players.

Peter probably would translate easier, ie. less chance of variance due to his position, skating ect..

Let's put them back on their old teams in their Peters rookie and 2nd season (his two best or peak) seasons? Peter would be the #1 center in Colorado and maybe have something like a 25-35 goal guy with maybe 40-50 assists at his peak given the current makeup of that team.

It really depends on so many variables but he could be a 75 point guy at his peak I guess if all went well, maybe a bit more.

Bossy, like I said would have more variance, a chance to boom or bust, mostly due to his skating (how he compared to his peers). Maybe that translates and he is a 40 plus goal scorer with Taveres, maybe his alck of foot speed limits his chances, who knows.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:51 PM
  #416
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
And you honestly believe Crosby is better at "reading plays/knowing the flow of the game" better than Gretzky?

Reality check.


And "90% of all players out there" is total exaggeration.
I have seen absolutely nothing on the defensive side of thing to put him up with a Lindros or a Forsberg or even a Sakic.

Seriously, the "new" Kovalchuk plays a sounder defensive game than Crosby does. No joke, he was damned impressive defensively last spring.
Crosby and his Pens were absolutely and most definitely not!
There is no doubt that Sid is alot better than Wayne was at the two way game, we have plenty of regular season statistical evidence to see that (as well for those that are old enough the eye test as well).

Wayne at his peak with the Oilers played a ":we will simply outscore you style of hockey and we don't care how many goals we give up" style.

None of the "Wayne would score 150 plus easy crowd" has addressed how the current NHL would tolerate that type of play, as the goal of all teams is to win right?

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:57 PM
  #417
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Some where between 1st and last.

Seriously i gave a pretty detailed opinion of how they compared to today's players.

Peter probably would translate easier, ie. less chance of variance due to his position, skating ect..

Let's put them back on their old teams in their Peters rookie and 2nd season (his two best or peak) seasons? Peter would be the #1 center in Colorado and maybe have something like a 25-35 goal guy with maybe 40-50 assists at his peak given the current makeup of that team.

It really depends on so many variables but he could be a 75 point guy at his peak I guess if all went well, maybe a bit more.

Bossy, like I said would have more variance, a chance to boom or bust, mostly due to his skating (how he compared to his peers). Maybe that translates and he is a 40 plus goal scorer with Taveres, maybe his alck of foot speed limits his chances, who knows.

So what you're saying is that Bossy would be about a 40-40 man and Stastny would be close behind.

A little more perspective....Phil Kessel would be as productive and maybe even slightly more so

But you know what, for the sake of progression, I'll ignore that silliness and move on.

In the 85/86 season Gretzky blew Bossy away by 74.8% and blew Stastny away by 76.2%.

Gretzky holding the same margin today over a 40-40 Bossy is 140 points.
140 points and that's taking your extremely liberal expectations of Bossy and Stastny's values.

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 10:06 PM
  #418
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
There is no doubt that Sid is alot better than Wayne was at the two way game, we have plenty of regular season statistical evidence to see that (as well for those that are old enough the eye test as well).

Wayne at his peak with the Oilers played a ":we will simply outscore you style of hockey and we don't care how many goals we give up" style.

None of the "Wayne would score 150 plus easy crowd" has addressed how the current NHL would tolerate that type of play, as the goal of all teams is to win right?
And AGAIN, explain then how when Gretzky and the Oiler's DID play responsible defense in the PO's, Gretzky still produced at incredible rates. Rates that aren't even much off of his regular season rates most years?

Or explain to us all how when Gretzky played in the Canada Cups, against the best of the best from around the world, he out scored all them too?
Playing defensively responsible defense to boot!

Sorry but your conclusions and theories simply don't hold any weight once we get to the head to head, peer to peer, era to era comparisons.

Gretzky--->Lemieux--->Jagr--->pre-lockout top players--->post lockout top players.
Crosby is IMO the best player since Jagr. Better than all the other pre and post lockout top players.
He still, IMO, is not better that Jagr and neither Jagr nor Crosby could even tie Wayne's or Mario's skate laces.


I've made this point before and I'll make it again.
It doesn't matter if the league is faster, bigger and employs tighter systems today.
Gretzky wasn't the fastest or remotely the strongest in the 80's either.
It was his ability to see things far ahead of anyone else along with his ridiculous accuracy with both his shots and passing that made him as great as he was.
Today's "systems" are all about giving up the low % play to eliminate the high % plays. Straight up, coaches go in with the mind set that if you can make the perfect pass/shot, you can beat us but the odds of that happening are slim at best.
Gretzky feasted on low % plays his whole career and it would be absolutely no different today.
As far as goaltending goes, it's a moot point. Every player Gretzky competed against back then played against the exact same goalies he did and he blew them all away.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 03-06-2013 at 10:19 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 10:09 PM
  #419
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
There is no doubt that Sid is... None of the "Wayne would score 150 plus easy crowd" has addressed how the current NHL would tolerate that type of play, as the goal of all teams is to win right?
Sidney Crosby is nowhere near the hockey player Wayne Gretzky was Hv, far more temporal, down to Earth. He has a two way game because he has to have one, and I think your discounting or forgetting that when called upon to do so, Gretzky's defensive game, literally stripping the puck off of an attackers stick and hoofing it back was a site to behold, and a rare one at that.

When your playing about 95% of your game from the centre in, when your opponents are terrified, reactive as opposed to being proactive, always on the defensive & very worried, when you can totally control the pace & movement of a game in your minds eye and in the palm of your hand the way Gretzky did, what does defence even matter? That he wouldnt transcend todays players & the way the games played with full-on cycle absent the centre ice-red line in the same way he did in the 80's? C'mon here. The rule changes and the way the games opened up, with better conditioning etc? Id add prolly 20% in points totals to what he did rack up back in the day. The guy was Supernatural. That kind of talent knows no boundaries of age or era.

Killion is online now  
Old
03-06-2013, 11:09 PM
  #420
ryanwb
Registered User
 
ryanwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I've always had the theory that the 1980s were a product of Gretzky, not the other way around. The NHL likes to play copycat and once the Oilers had some success other teams copied this trend. Only until 1995 and 1996 when trap happy teams started winning did this change. Gretzky literally changed the mindset of OTHER NHL teams.

I think you have to realize that there are some lousy teams out there today as well. Columbus has always been lousy. Florida too. Teams like this on the surface have more points than the worst back in the 1980s but how much of that is because of the shootout and the extra point? In 1984 the Hartford Whalers beat Edmonton 11-0. Who would have predicted that? I guess what I am saying is that lousy teams have always been able to beat the best teams on any given night. This is sports, anything is possible. Nothing has changed.

Look, I was watching a Legends of Hockey video the other night and they were profiling Jean Beliveau. It is an old interview. Ted Lindsay said: "To me he is the best center that ever lived. This isn't disregarding Lemieux or Gretzky, but he played at a time when checking was tough, when guys knew HOW to body check and you took your man." Exact quote. The word in capitals is the word Lindsay emphasized. So what does this mean? It means that whether it is a previous era questioning the current one or the current one questioning the previous one it is always the same conclusion, MY era wins out. The only thing is, both parties are wrong. Gretzky would have been a star in any era he played in. He was questioned in his OWN era. Bobby Clarke said Gretzky wouldn't "last" in the NHL. What you are doing is nothing new, it is just something that has been going on for decades. It is more or less an idea of "If I can't see it happen with my own eyes today, then it wouldn't happen." I am afraid a prime Gretzky would just embarass the NHL all over again today.
I agree with everything you just said with no exceptions. Where we differ is in the details, obviously. Gretzky may very well have caused other coaches to change their game plan which led to the high flying era of the 80s and early 90s. I'm not going to debate that, but my point was that those times are past. IF Gretzky were to come in to today's league, which is unarguably better coached defensively, other teams wouldn't necessarily change to a freewheeling style of hockey, because while Gretzky's team would be successful, the also rans of the league often have to compensate by playing a defense first game due to their insufficient talent level. Like you said, it just took until 95 or so before they actually figured this out it seems.

So sure there have always been bottom feeders, but Columbus doesn't beat the Penguins 11-0. Ever. (At least I doubt it ) The game isn't like that anymore, that's my only point. I don't want to nitpick about the details, I agree that Gretzky 2.0 would absolutely put on a clinic in today's NHL, but not enough that he would come close to the records he put up in the past. That's all.

As for the Ted Lindsay quote I find that quite funny. He's just jealous.

Try telling P.K. Subban that he doesn't know HOW to check:


ryanwb is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 11:36 PM
  #421
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanwb View Post
I agree with everything you just said with no exceptions. Where we differ is in the details, obviously. Gretzky may very well have caused other coaches to change their game plan which led to the high flying era of the 80s and early 90s. I'm not going to debate that, but my point was that those times are past. IF Gretzky were to come in to today's league, which is unarguably better coached defensively, other teams wouldn't necessarily change to a freewheeling style of hockey, because while Gretzky's team would be successful, the also rans of the league often have to compensate by playing a defense first game due to their insufficient talent level. Like you said, it just took until 95 or so before they actually figured this out it seems.

So sure there have always been bottom feeders, but Columbus doesn't beat the Penguins 11-0. Ever. (At least I doubt it ) The game isn't like that anymore, that's my only point. I don't want to nitpick about the details, I agree that Gretzky 2.0 would absolutely put on a clinic in today's NHL, but not enough that he would come close to the records he put up in the past. That's all.

As for the Ted Lindsay quote I find that quite funny. He's just jealous.

Try telling P.K. Subban that he doesn't know HOW to check:

The current state of dead-puck hockey isnt going to last forever either. The worm will eventually turn: It always does. People thought the high-flying days of the '80s was going to last indefinitely too.

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 08:35 AM
  #422
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
So what you're saying is that Bossy would be about a 40-40 man and Stastny would be close behind.

A little more perspective....Phil Kessel would be as productive and maybe even slightly more so

But you know what, for the sake of progression, I'll ignore that silliness and move on.

In the 85/86 season Gretzky blew Bossy away by 74.8% and blew Stastny away by 76.2%.

Gretzky holding the same margin today over a 40-40 Bossy is 140 points.
140 points and that's taking your extremely liberal expectations of Bossy and Stastny's values.
You still can't get around the problem of simply transplanting what happened in the 80's to the current NHL.

It doesn't work that way and it's not as simple as that.

Unless you think that any team is going to be able to run up the socre in the current NHL on a regular basis.

Even a stacked Detroit doesn't do that against Columbus in their division in recent years.

Or the Canucks on the Oilers.

That's simply a circled that hasn't been squared in the equation.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 08:50 AM
  #423
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
The current state of dead-puck hockey isnt going to last forever either. The worm will eventually turn: It always does. People thought the high-flying days of the '80s was going to last indefinitely too.
The puck has never been dead they still treat it the same way they always have.

Unless there is a drastic change to goalie equipment and coaches are removed from the game or other drastic changes like that scoring isn't going to increase in any dramatic fashion any time soon.

If we look at objectively, we know why scoring is down and it's not a lack of skill or talent.

The game quite simply has changed and the conditions will not allow for a legend or god like Wayne, Orr or Mario to exist in terms of domination any more at the NHL level.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:23 AM
  #424
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
The puck has never been dead they still treat it the same way they always have.

Unless there is a drastic change to goalie equipment and coaches are removed from the game or other drastic changes like that scoring isn't going to increase in any dramatic fashion any time soon.

If we look at objectively, we know why scoring is down and it's not a lack of skill or talent.

The game quite simply has changed and the conditions will not allow for a legend or god like Wayne, Orr or Mario to exist in terms of domination any more at the NHL level.
Again, it's a chicken-and-egg question. If a Wayne Gretzky ever came along again, then yeah the game would change once again (as Big Phil said). Coaches would stop worrying so much about sound two-way hockey from their centers if they produced 120, 130, 140, 150 (or in Wayne's case 200) points.

When coaches can't get consistent offensive production, then two-way play gets magnified. But when your No. 1 center produces at a consistently high level, who cares? There are more than a few ways to skin a cat. There is more than one way to win at hockey.

We just need another Gretzky, and that's not going to happen.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:46 AM
  #425
metalfoot
Karlsson!
 
metalfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,544
vCash: 500
Here's a thought... maybe Karlsson and Letang are the Orr/Potvin (OK, I know, I know) of our generation and the next Gretzky's just around the corner...

metalfoot 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 12:48 AM.

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.