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.

Why Mike Gartner isn't famous?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-01-2013, 02:53 PM
  #51
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foy View Post
So Mike Gartner is just a poor man's Gordie Howe?
Obviously not. The point is that no credit is given around here for a player being just darn good for a long time. To be that good for that long to me = greatness. Not greatness on a Gretzky-Lemieux-Howe-Orr level, but it's a great achievement that most players cannot attain. Hence being that high on the all-time goals list. Period. Even if you wanted to "adjust" that, how many players nowadays are 30 goal guys for say 20 straight seasons to end up at 600? But a player has a couple fluke seasons to add to his resume instead and suddenly he's the better player. You can rank Gartner where you want as a player, but career achievement wise he deserves a ton of credit. More than what he gets around here.

and so on


Last edited by tjcurrie: 04-01-2013 at 03:03 PM.
tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:02 PM
  #52
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjcurrie View Post
Obviously not. The point is that no credit is given around here for a player being just darn good for a long time. To be that good for that long to me = greatness. Not greatness on a Gretzky-Lemieux-Howe-Orr level, but it's a great achievement that most players cannot attain. Hence being that high on the all-time goals list. Period. Even if you wanted to "adjust" that, how many players nowadays are 30 goal guys for say 20 straight seasons to end up at 600? Nobody. But a player has a couple fluke seasons to add to his resume instead and suddenly he's the better player. You can rank Gartner where you want as a player, but career achievement wise he deserves a ton of credit. more than what he gets around here.

and so on
I agree.

The compiler label gets thrown around here much too easily.

Staying in the league and producing for a long time is HARD.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 03:11 PM
  #53
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I agree.

The compiler label gets thrown around here much too easily.

Staying in the league and producing for a long time is HARD.
Exactly. This is the best league in the world and it takes a special player to be able to do that. Most players cannot. And "most" is an understatement. At the end of the day you don't rank Gartner among others by his totals, but you look at his career achievement and you have to hold that in high regard. He just deserves more credit than what he gets around here. How many players even from his era ended up where he did? Heck, not even Jari Kurri with his two 60-70 goal seasons could do it.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 06:01 PM
  #54
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
For what it's worth, Gartner was in the top-10 in goals scored five times during his career. He's often derided as "the ultimate compiler", but did have higher peaks than Ciccarelli, Recchi, and Andreychuk as it pertained to putting the puck in the net.
depending on how you define "peak," you could say he had the same peak as ciccarelli and andreychuk (barely hits top five in goals in his best year). gartner obviously has more low top ten finishes to round out his career, but that's a prime/longevity argument more than a peak one. ciccarelli was by most measures the better goal scorer when he was on, but he was maddeningly inconsistent in comparison to gartner, who was almost like clockwork in his prime. but then ciccarelli has two top fives (separated by a number of years), whereas gartner has his one single top five.

recchi wasn't the goal scorer those other three guys are. but he was many many multiples the playmaker any of them were, and-- with the possible exception of ciccarelli-- the only guy who could lead a dangerous offense instead of being a valued contributing part of it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishdul View Post
Recchi doesn't fit either. He was a top 5 scorer in the NHL 3 different times. Anecdotally I'd say the way people viewed Recchi was quite a bit higher than Gartner during their peak years.
yup. recchi and gartner had the exact same peak year-- 1991-- and recchi received 25 all-star votes (12 seconds, 13 thirds) and one stray MVP vote (ballots only had room for three guys; if it was five like now, recchi would likely have gotten a lot more votes because he was outstanding that year keeping the penguins in the playoff race with mario out, but i doubt gartner factors either way). gartner received no all-star votes. recchi also outscored him by 44 points that year and won the cup.


but as others have said, gartner is not an average player by any means. he was a quite good-to-very good but mostly one-dimensional goal scorer with exceptional longevity.

as for his one-dimensionality, he did play a defensive role on the '87 stanley cup, didn't he? didn't keenan stack his checking line with speed-- gartner, messier, anderson? he rarely showed any of that in the NHL, but i guess if he'd taken on those kinds of responsibilities, he probably wouldn't have produced the consistently good offensive numbers that he did. ironically, he might have been the more valuable player, or at least more valuable piece to more competitive teams, but he probably wouldn't be in the hall of fame without that 700 number.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 06:26 PM
  #55
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Under different circumstances, he might be viewed differently. He reminds me a lot of Glenn Anderson in the way he played. Anderson had a boatload of opportunities in the playoffs that Gartner never had. And you can't really credit Anderson for those opportunities because he played with so many great players. Yes, he contributed a great deal, but if he had played on the teams Gartner did would he have taken them to another level? I doubt it. Would Gartner's career be as long if he had played the amount of playoff hockey Anderson did? I doubt it.

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 06:34 PM
  #56
Dutchess
HFB Partner
 
Dutchess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 645
vCash: 500
The '80s scoring. It's why he, Dino Ciccarelli, and those of his ilk have as many points and goals as they do.

Dutchess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 07:49 PM
  #57
CHIP72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Country: United States
Posts: 360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
depending on how you define "peak," you could say he had the same peak as ciccarelli and andreychuk (barely hits top five in goals in his best year). gartner obviously has more low top ten finishes to round out his career, but that's a prime/longevity argument more than a peak one. ciccarelli was by most measures the better goal scorer when he was on, but he was maddeningly inconsistent in comparison to gartner, who was almost like clockwork in his prime. but then ciccarelli has two top fives (separated by a number of years), whereas gartner has his one single top five.

recchi wasn't the goal scorer those other three guys are. but he was many many multiples the playmaker any of them were, and-- with the possible exception of ciccarelli-- the only guy who could lead a dangerous offense instead of being a valued contributing part of it.




yup. recchi and gartner had the exact same peak year-- 1991-- and recchi received 25 all-star votes (12 seconds, 13 thirds) and one stray MVP vote (ballots only had room for three guys; if it was five like now, recchi would likely have gotten a lot more votes because he was outstanding that year keeping the penguins in the playoff race with mario out, but i doubt gartner factors either way). gartner received no all-star votes. recchi also outscored him by 44 points that year and won the cup.


but as others have said, gartner is not an average player by any means. he was a quite good-to-very good but mostly one-dimensional goal scorer with exceptional longevity.

as for his one-dimensionality, he did play a defensive role on the '87 stanley cup, didn't he? didn't keenan stack his checking line with speed-- gartner, messier, anderson? he rarely showed any of that in the NHL, but i guess if he'd taken on those kinds of responsibilities, he probably wouldn't have produced the consistently good offensive numbers that he did. ironically, he might have been the more valuable player, or at least more valuable piece to more competitive teams, but he probably wouldn't be in the hall of fame without that 700 number.
I'm really confused by the part I bolded above:

1) Mike Gartner didn't play in the 1987 Stanley Cup Finals with Edmonton (or for that matter with Philadelphia). In fact, Gartner never played in the Stanley Cup Finals period, in any year. He also never played for Edmonton (or Philadelphia).

2) Mike Keenan DID coach in the 1987 Stanley Cup Finals, but it was with Philadelphia, not Edmonton.

3) The one year I think Mike Gartner, Mark Messier, and Glenn Anderson all played for the same team (1994 with the Rangers) they didn't play on the team at the same time. In fact, Gartner was traded for Anderson by Mike Keenan.

4) I doubt Gartner, Messier, or Anderson played on any checking lines in 1987, and I know Messier and probably Gartner didn't play on any checking lines in 1994.

CHIP72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 07:53 PM
  #58
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHIP72 View Post
I'm really confused by the part I bolded above:

1) Mike Gartner didn't play in the 1987 Stanley Cup Finals with Edmonton (or for that matter with Philadelphia). In fact, Gartner never played in the Stanley Cup Finals period, in any year. He also never played for Edmonton (or Philadelphia).

2) Mike Keenan DID coach in the 1987 Stanley Cup Finals, but it was with Philadelphia, not Edmonton.

3) The one year I think Mike Gartner, Mark Messier, and Glenn Anderson all played for the same team (1994 with the Rangers) they didn't play on the team at the same time. In fact, Gartner was traded for Anderson by Mike Keenan.

4) I doubt Gartner, Messier, or Anderson played on any checking lines in 1987, and I know Messier and probably Gartner didn't play on any checking lines in 1994.
I think he meant Canada Cup, not Stanley Cup. All of what he says makes sense, and Anderson-Messier-Gartner went head-to-head with the KLM line throughout the final.

I'm not what you'd call a Gartner fan, but he was pretty damn good that series, at both ends of the ice.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 08:00 PM
  #59
Evincar
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjcurrie View Post
Exactly. This is the best league in the world and it takes a special player to be able to do that. Most players cannot. And "most" is an understatement. At the end of the day you don't rank Gartner among others by his totals, but you look at his career achievement and you have to hold that in high regard. He just deserves more credit than what he gets around here. How many players even from his era ended up where he did? Heck, not even Jari Kurri with his two 60-70 goal seasons could do it.
Most players dont have the opportunity due to being unlucky with injuries.

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 08:28 PM
  #60
Ogie Goldthorpe
Piloted Ogre Hog
 
Ogie Goldthorpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NS via BC
Posts: 2,565
vCash: 500
I watched him quite a bit. He was a good player, but if he was your best player, you might struggle to make the playoffs. On the other hand, if you team needed some secondary scoring to get over the top, he'd be your man. And he kept that level of performance up for a very long time.

Straight B student.

The one thing that always impressed me, besides his consistency, was his skating. He was one of the best skaters the game has ever seen, IMHO.

Ogie Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 10:16 PM
  #61
whatname
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 189
vCash: 500
Gartner was like those actors that are constantly in good movies, but never in the leading role. He was never really a candidate for any awards, other than perhaps a Lady Byng in the lockout season. There were plenty of guys like him, although not to the extent of his consistency, e.g. Stephane Richer, Ray Sheppard, etc., and those guys also didn't get recognized much in the league.

whatname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 10:25 PM
  #62
yave1964
22 and counting
 
yave1964's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Lexington ohio
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Four things kept Gartner from getting the credit he was due as a truly great player IMO.

1. He never won a Stanley cup. Never made it to a final.

2. He was a rolling stone, played for the Stingers (WHA) the Capitals when they weren't particularly good, the North Stars, Rangers, (Traded the year they won the cup) the Leafs and finally finishing up with the Coyotes. Some very non memorable teams.

3. He was very low key, even reading his bio in legends of hockey, he pokes fun at his self a half a dozen times or more. He was never one to toot his own horn, just the opposite if anything.

4. He never had the big year, he was the Hockey version of Don Sutton, the hall of fame pitcher who won over 300 games, seemingly with one season after another of 15-11, 17-12 type of years.
Gartner punched the clock year in year out with 30-40 goals, never a bad season, occasionally a 48 or even one 50 goal season, but they were overshadowed every time by the true superstars of his era, so his consistent greatness was overshadowed. It is, like Sutton only when looking at the overall body of work that you realize that the statistical evidence supports him as a truly great. hockeyreference.com does a wonderful bit, where they statisticly rate each player according to their closest statistical comps. According to them, the five players with the most similar statistics to Gartner are:

Norm Ullman-HOF
Vinnie Damphouse
Dino Ciccarelli HOF
Jason Arnott
Rod Brind'amour

Others in his top ten comps include Dave Andreychuk who is certainly destined for the hall, John Bucyk who is in, Alex Delvecchio who is in, Joe Nieuwendyk who is in and Doug Gilmour. Quite a nice bunch.

Many players with lesser stats than Gartner will sail in, based off of one or two big years. He never had the big season, he doesn't get the credit he deserves because of that, but he was a truly great player.

yave1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-01-2013, 10:25 PM
  #63
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,669
vCash: 500
A threat to score any time he was on the ice.

I could care less bout what people thought about him. The dude was a speed demon, had a cannon of a shot and could snipe with the best of them.

One of the most underrated playes in the history of the NHL

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 04:23 PM
  #64
Yamaguchi
Registered User
 
Yamaguchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 677
vCash: 500
Mike Gartner was one of my favourite players.

I would love to see him skating on a line with Sergei Fedorov and Bob Nystrom. If this only was possible...

Yamaguchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 06:01 PM
  #65
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I agree.

The compiler label gets thrown around here much too easily.

Staying in the league and producing for a long time is HARD.
Yeah your opinion can be understood when you have Ron Francis as your avatar. Better itangibles then Gartner and better in the play-offs, but just about the same case of players in terms of compilers. Maybe a little bit better offensively as well.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 08:28 PM
  #66
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yeah your opinion can be understood when you have Ron Francis as your avatar. Better itangibles then Gartner and better in the play-offs, but just about the same case of players in terms of compilers. Maybe a little bit better offensively as well.
I've been defending Francis for years on here. All three of them I have been here.

But yeah, he is my avatar at the moment since I have him in the ATD this year.

And also it is quite amusing that you think Francis is better in every aspect of the game than a 700 goal scorer and still consider him a compiler.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 10:03 PM
  #67
ryanwb
Registered User
 
ryanwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
A threat to score any time he was on the ice.

I could care less bout what people thought about him. The dude was a speed demon, had a cannon of a shot and could snipe with the best of them.

One of the most underrated playes in the history of the NHL
Sounds like Phil Kessel

ryanwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 11:29 PM
  #68
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
For what it's worth, Gartner was in the top-10 in goals scored five times during his career. He's often derided as "the ultimate compiler", but did have higher peaks than Ciccarelli, Recchi, and Andreychuk as it pertained to putting the puck in the net.
His top 10 were a 5,9,9,9, 10

And that's his absolute best.

Probably doesn't belong in the hHOF and there are few here that are more career guys than me.

Gartner simply didn't do much more than win the fastest skater contest and score at a good but not great rate for a long time.

The term compiler fits him to a T.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 11:38 PM
  #69
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by yave1964 View Post
Four things kept Gartner from getting the credit he was due as a truly great player IMO.

1. He never won a Stanley cup. Never made it to a final.

2. He was a rolling stone, played for the Stingers (WHA) the Capitals when they weren't particularly good, the North Stars, Rangers, (Traded the year they won the cup) the Leafs and finally finishing up with the Coyotes. Some very non memorable teams.

3. He was very low key, even reading his bio in legends of hockey, he pokes fun at his self a half a dozen times or more. He was never one to toot his own horn, just the opposite if anything.

4. He never had the big year, he was the Hockey version of Don Sutton, the hall of fame pitcher who won over 300 games, seemingly with one season after another of 15-11, 17-12 type of years.
Gartner punched the clock year in year out with 30-40 goals, never a bad season, occasionally a 48 or even one 50 goal season, but they were overshadowed every time by the true superstars of his era, so his consistent greatness was overshadowed. It is, like Sutton only when looking at the overall body of work that you realize that the statistical evidence supports him as a truly great. hockeyreference.com does a wonderful bit, where they statisticly rate each player according to their closest statistical comps. According to them, the five players with the most similar statistics to Gartner are:

Norm Ullman-HOF
Vinnie Damphouse
Dino Ciccarelli HOF
Jason Arnott
Rod Brind'amour

Others in his top ten comps include Dave Andreychuk who is certainly destined for the hall, John Bucyk who is in, Alex Delvecchio who is in, Joe Nieuwendyk who is in and Doug Gilmour. Quite a nice bunch.

Many players with lesser stats than Gartner will sail in, based off of one or two big years. He never had the big season, he doesn't get the credit he deserves because of that, but he was a truly great player.
Did you see Dave buying a ticket?

That's the only way he is getting into the Hall.

It's interesting to note that except for Gilmour and to a lesser extent Delvecchio all of the other players listed were secondary support type of guys who were quite good but never great and a guy you would want to build a team around.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 12:56 AM
  #70
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Did you see Dave buying a ticket?

That's the only way he is getting into the Hall.
Maybe if there is a "Power Play" wing.

Uncle Rotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 01:03 AM
  #71
Evincar
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Did you see Dave buying a ticket?

That's the only way he is getting into the Hall.
Are you saying you would be shocked if Dave was eventually inducted?

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 01:09 AM
  #72
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Litework View Post
Are you saying you would be shocked if Dave was eventually inducted?
Yes and I think most people here would be as well.

I can name at least 10 guys more worthy who aren't in the HHOF and likely won't get in either.

I doubt Dave was ever, not even once, a top 25 player in the world.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 01:55 AM
  #73
Eisen
Registered User
 
Eisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene
Country: Germany
Posts: 6,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Litework View Post
Are you saying you would be shocked if Dave was eventually inducted?
I would shake my head in disbelief for minutes. I did that too when Ciccarelli was inducted, and Nieuwendyk.

Eisen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:07 AM
  #74
Marlowe Syn
R-O-C-K-F-O-R-D
 
Marlowe Syn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the grift
Country: United States
Posts: 1,359
vCash: 500
Garts was one of my favorite players. I remember I was driving to traffic court when I heard about the Dino/Mike trade. I was probably the only person that was happy about that trade in Minnesota. I met Dino twice as a kid, and he was a world class d**k both times. So there was a bit of a personal bias. While he was only with the North Stars for a couple of seasons he is still one of my all time favorite North Stars. I believe we would have given Pittsburgh a better run for our money in the SCFs of 1990-91 with Gartner on the roster over Ulf Dahlen.

Marlowe Syn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 12:37 PM
  #75
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post

I doubt Dave was ever, not even once, a top 25 player in the world.
Or even Canada

Uncle Rotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:18 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.