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.

Gretzky, Lemieux and Crosby comparables

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-17-2013, 11:14 PM
  #301
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
This:
so what part applies to Wayne's decline?

this is Overpass with his comments on Wayne

Quote:
Gretzkyís career numbers are surprisingly unimpressive. Fourth place isnít bad, but one would expect more from the Great One. However, a season-by-season examination reveals that almost all of his positive value came in his Edmonton years, and he was barely above average in Los Angeles and New York. For this reason I see him as more of a terrific 8-10 year prime candidate than a 20 year Bourque or Howe type candidate, despite his high scoring throughout his career.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:21 AM
  #302
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
Funny it doesn't matter which teams scores the most goals in a game either too right?
Sooooo....let's say Gretzky has 6 points in an 6-5 Oiler win where 5 points are on the PP and the other is a shorty but the opposition also scores a shorty and 1 at 5v5 while he is on the ice so he finishes the game -1.
Are you honestly trying to imply that his ability to influence victory is diminished in said game because he was -1???

That is exactly what you are implying with the context and weight you're giving +/- in this case.



Quote:
Or will you just continue to ignore what doesn't fit your narrative?
Our narrative?
That's rich.
You seem to be the only one with narrative issues, not mention a severe case of movinggoalpostistis.
Seriously what are you on, like your 7th different position now?


Quote:
Look Wayne is my number 1 player of all time but his decline in ES effectiveness is pretty darn clear here.
Ohhhhh so now it's just his decline eh?
What happened to your opinion (presented as fact) from earlier (and what started a lot of this in the first place) that is was a SUDDEN decline?

NO ONE was arguing that Gretzky wasn't starting the downside of his peak around '87.

And what happened to the whole "changing tides" thing you were arguing earlier?
Those "goal posts" seem to have found a different field eh


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 04-18-2013 at 12:34 AM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:29 AM
  #303
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
so what part applies to Wayne's decline?

this is Overpass with his comments on Wayne
I bet if OP re-did the study and separated Gretzky's LA years pre and post Suter hit, it would reveal very different results.

Lets see if OP has the time.

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:05 AM
  #304
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I bet if OP re-did the study and separated Gretzky's LA years pre and post Suter hit, it would reveal very different results.

Lets see if OP has the time.
This reliance on the Suter hit to show everything dropped because of it is getting really tired.

The Suter hit happened just like Sid's injuries.

Wayne's dominance on 5-5 was slipping before the Suter hit.

His point totals were going down before the Suter hit.

We could play the what if game with dozens of players, let's stick to what actually happened here okay.

I started with a thought and then expanded on it, you got hung up on a musing, for what purpose god only knows, move on deal with the question at hand and stop evading it.

We all know that Wayne was elite scoring late in his career. the ES side of the equation taken as a whole shows that he was an average player on the whole after Edmonton, even though he was elite offensively.

This is looking at his regular season play and stats.

How hard is that to understand?

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:34 AM
  #305
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
This reliance on the Suter hit to show everything dropped because of it is getting really tired.
IT DID!!!
There was a slow decline over a 5 year period and then BAM!!! The bottom dropped out.
With everything presented in this thread so far, it absolutely baffles me that you still try and deny the affect that hit on Gretzky.

What's getting tired is your constant use of Gretzky's stats post 90/91 in your broken record "League Evolution" rhetoric.

Even THE most casual fan could see the difference in Gretzky pre and post Suter!

Quote:
The Suter hit happened just like Sid's injuries.
I'm sorry, I must of missed the Injury that is going to leave Sid permanently reduced in his ability to skate, shoot and turn as well as leaving him in constant pain both on and off the ice for the rest of his life.

Quote:
Wayne's dominance on 5-5 was slipping before the Suter hit.

His point totals were going down before the Suter hit.
Who said they weren't???
THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE. YOU SAID IT WAS A SUDDEN DROP OFF!
Helloooooo...goal posts, where did you gooooooo?

Quote:
We could play the what if game with dozens of players, let's stick to what actually happened here okay.
What what if's?
Have you actually seen the amount of evidence presented in this thread against what you're trying to say? Seriously?

All you have is some +/-'s and a cherry picked comment from OP.
A comment I'm hoping we can get him to rectify through the separation of the pre and post Suter years in LA instead of his entire time there in one big block.

Based on what Czech presented earlier, I have little doubt what such a separation will reveal and it will based on fact, not what if's.

Quote:
I started with a thought and then expanded on it, you got hung up on a musing, for what purpose god only knows, move on deal with the question at hand and stop evading it.
Oh it's your "musing" now is it?
That is was the "changing Tides".
That is was a change in League priorities that caused Gretzky's decline.
That is was the introduction of more supposed Elite talent.
That Gretzky's decline prior to '91 was sudden.

I would still like a response from something earlier though.
You said that Gretzky was no longer Elite at ES by 90/91.
Please provide us with the names of players that were Elite at ES from 88/99-90/91 and we'll compare them to Gretzky.
That's fair right?


Quote:
We all know that Wayne was elite scoring late in his career. the ES side of the equation taken as a whole shows that he was an average player on the whole after Edmonton, even though he was elite offensively.

This is looking at his regular season play and stats.

How hard is that to understand?
It's not hard to understand.
Again, just provide the list of players that you would consider Elite at ES from 88/89-90/91 and we'll see if what you say holds up.
It's that easy.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 04-18-2013 at 01:41 AM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 07:01 AM
  #306
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
so what part applies to Wayne's decline?

this is Overpass with his comments on Wayne
I happen to disagree with overpass in this instance outside of the fact that it is true Gretzky was treading water in adjusted +/- in LA.


At least a few things off the top of my head, although I'm not sure why I am wasting my time:

1. He wasn't used exactly the same in LA as EDM. Gretzky was relied upon for a lot more because the Kings obviously weren't a dynasty.

2. He didn't score quite as much with the weaker options on his new team. (However, still at a pace only one other player has ever matched.) Meanwhile the weaker team got scored on a lot (outside 90-91 when Wayne was far and away their top scorer and not surprisingly a +30).

3. 88-90 Gretzky had a strong off ice scoring counterpart in Nicholls. I don't remember for sure right now but I think that Robitaille often played with Nicholls too. Players with strong linemates and poor off-ice counterparts do quite well in adjusted +/-. Gretzky was in the opposite situation.

4. Suter gooning him then caused a large drop off in the positive side of his ratio because his even strength scoring demonstrably dropped suddenly and permanently, and in addition, like most other offensive stars, he slowed down in his 30s.


Last edited by BraveCanadian: 04-18-2013 at 08:14 AM.
BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:29 AM
  #307
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,588
vCash: 500
It baffles me that after all the evidence put together by Czech Your Math that Gretzky's ESGF/GA ratio plummeted after 1991 for good (after being consistent for 3 years in LA), Hardyvan STILL hasn't acknowledged this ridiculous drop off or answered why it actually took place. It further baffles me that he would compare Gretzky's precedent setting herniated thoracic disc injury to anything Crosby had ever suffered. This was an injury that no hockey player had ever had before, and his own doctor thought there was a chance he would never play hockey again.

tazzy19 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:40 AM
  #308
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,373
vCash: 50
These are Gretzky's weighted averages by GP:

'80-'87: 141 AES/82, 1.67 On, 1.62 On/Off
'88-'91: 121 AES/82, 1.34 On, 1.20 On/Off
'92-'99: 76 AES/82, 0.93 On, 1.05 On/Off

The '88-'91 period looks like a slightly less productive player due to age, who may also be affected by his new team. The '92-'99 player looks like a completely different player.

Czech Your Math is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:16 AM
  #309
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
These are Gretzky's weighted averages by GP:

'80-'87: 141 AES/82, 1.67 On, 1.62 On/Off
'88-'91: 121 AES/82, 1.34 On, 1.20 On/Off
'92-'99: 76 AES/82, 0.93 On, 1.05 On/Off

The '88-'91 period looks like a slightly less productive player due to age, who may also be affected by his new team. The '92-'99 player looks like a completely different player.
Bingo.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:26 PM
  #310
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 Czech Your Math View Post
These are Gretzky's weighted averages by GP:

'80-'87: 141 AES/82, 1.67 On, 1.62 On/Off
'88-'91: 121 AES/82, 1.34 On, 1.20 On/Off
'92-'99: 76 AES/82, 0.93 On, 1.05 On/Off

The '88-'91 period looks like a slightly less productive player due to age, who may also be affected by his new team. The '92-'99 player looks like a completely different player.
Yep, about where I thought it would be after your earlier data.
Thanks Czech.

Let see where the goal posts end up next

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:23 PM
  #311
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
These are Gretzky's weighted averages by GP:

'80-'87: 141 AES/82, 1.67 On, 1.62 On/Off
'88-'91: 121 AES/82, 1.34 On, 1.20 On/Off
'92-'99: 76 AES/82, 0.93 On, 1.05 On/Off

The '88-'91 period looks like a slightly less productive player due to age, who may also be affected by his new team. The '92-'99 player looks like a completely different player.
Sometimes the truth is far too obvious to ever admit. Thanks Czech Your Math for the hard evidence that most semi-rational people -- from casual fans to hockey experts -- have known for years. If this doesn't put the debate to rest, I don't know think anything ever will.

I might add, this just makes me even more angry with Gary Suter. Gretz could have had easily 3000+ points and maybe even a 1000 goals if not for him....not to mention a couple more scoring titles.

tazzy19 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:07 PM
  #312
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
No but most elite players don't peak at 26 then decline starting at 27 either.
I really don't know what the decline is your are talking about. When I think of a post 1988 Gretzky I use the word "decline" with quotations. He wins the Hart trophy and we are saying he is in the decline with 168 points? I'll say this, Gretzky's "decline" is far superior to a normal HHOF player's BEST season!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
This reliance on the Suter hit to show everything dropped because of it is getting really tired.

The Suter hit happened just like Sid's injuries.

Wayne's dominance on 5-5 was slipping before the Suter hit.

His point totals were going down before the Suter hit.
Not true. Starting in 1989 he has a slight drop in overall points with 168 in comparison to 149 (186 projected). Then 142 and then 163. Then after the Suter hit he drops to 121, is a minus player for the first time in his 13 year career.

ES points:
1989 - 100
1990 - 96
1991 - 103
1992 - 63.....................

Come on, you don't see a difference here? It is practically slapping you in the face. His point totals were rather stagnant the pre-Suter time he was in L.A. It is clear he had a slight drop in points since his Oiler years, but in all honesty, what the heck is the point here? Hardy, I want to ask you that? What is the point trying to be made here? Gretzky was clearly a different player after 1991. Even though the stats support this as clear as day I can tell you that from watching him at that time. He was still a great player, but post 1991 was a huge turning point as to when we saw him go from embarassing the league to merely just being an Art Ross threat - all in one year.

To me there is Oilers Gretzky, early Kings Gretzky and post Suter Gretzky. That post Suter Gretzky lasted up until the end of his career. But he aged and got slower and less dangerous, as is the case with anyone.

I showed you that chart as to just how normal it is for an all-time great player - even Lemieux - to have a drop in his ES totals and rely a little bit more on the power play. You aren't exactly coming up with some revelation that wasn't already there.

Big Phil is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 07:19 PM
  #313
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzy19 View Post
Sometimes the truth is far too obvious to ever admit. Thanks Czech Your Math for the hard evidence that most semi-rational people -- from casual fans to hockey experts -- have known for years. If this doesn't put the debate to rest, I don't know think anything ever will.

I might add, this just makes me even more angry with Gary Suter. Gretz could have had easily 3000+ points and maybe even a 1000 goals if not for him....not to mention a couple more scoring titles.
Ya, Gretz was close to breaking some even bigger milestones than he already did. Clearly 2000 assists would have happened, he nearly hit that anyways, and I don't think it's a stretch to think 2200 was possible. Also, 900 goals was a certainly, and as you say 1000 may have been possible as well (I'm only going by lost time, not permanant after effects of injury either, which obviously caused even further drop in his numbers). He could have had between 3000 and 3300 points probably.

shazariahl is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:34 PM
  #314
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
IT DID!!!
There was a slow decline over a 5 year period and then BAM!!! The bottom dropped out.
With everything presented in this thread so far, it absolutely baffles me that you still try and deny the affect that hit on Gretzky.

What's getting tired is your constant use of Gretzky's stats post 90/91 in your broken record "League Evolution" rhetoric.

Even THE most casual fan could see the difference in Gretzky pre and post Suter!



I'm sorry, I must of missed the Injury that is going to leave Sid permanently reduced in his ability to skate, shoot and turn as well as leaving him in constant pain both on and off the ice for the rest of his life.



Who said they weren't???
THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE. YOU SAID IT WAS A SUDDEN DROP OFF!
Helloooooo...goal posts, where did you gooooooo?
It was still quite the drop off in 88 in the plus/minus department from his previous peak. Since Overpass was quite careful, rightfully so IMO, not to put too much importance in a single season we can conclude the 89 and 90 continued drop off was probably already occurring in 88.

These things aren't absolutes, they are probabilities, at least if one looks at them objectively. If one is absolute when they is conflicting evidence then they are on shaky ground.

The funny thing about the injury is that if one looks at the entire statistical record for Wayne, it's really hard to pick out when the devastating injury took place.

I mean he lead the league in scoring in 93, and had a decent playoff too, and in assists in 97 and 98.

The hit occurred and he might have aged the same way if it hadn't, it's something we don't know.



Quote:
Oh it's your "musing" now is it?
That is was the "changing Tides".
That is was a change in League priorities that caused Gretzky's decline.
That is was the introduction of more supposed Elite talent.
That Gretzky's decline prior to '91 was sudden.

I would still like a response from something earlier though.
You said that Gretzky was no longer Elite at ES by 90/91.
Please provide us with the names of players that were Elite at ES from 88/99-90/91 and we'll compare them to Gretzky.
That's fair right?





It's not hard to understand.
Again, just provide the list of players that you would consider Elite at ES from 88/89-90/91 and we'll see if what you say holds up.
It's that easy.
to the bolded part, you only want to look at one part of the even strength equation, the scoring points part, which I ahve stated continusioulsy he was still elite.

His overall effectiveness at ES wasn't elite any more though as we can see by his ESGF/ESGA ratio which had dipped down to 1.13 and 1.14 respectively in 89 and 90.

I can go back and look and maybe someone has numbers in a file for those 2 seasons but pretty sure there were many players with a better ratio than Wayne.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:39 PM
  #315
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzy19 View Post
Sometimes the truth is far too obvious to ever admit. Thanks Czech Your Math for the hard evidence that most semi-rational people -- from casual fans to hockey experts -- have known for years. If this doesn't put the debate to rest, I don't know think anything ever will.

I might add, this just makes me even more angry with Gary Suter. Gretz could have had easily 3000+ points and maybe even a 1000 goals if not for him....not to mention a couple more scoring titles.
see this is the part that I knew it would come to.

Easily an extra 143 points over those last 8 seasons?

I guess he might have with alot of ifs going his way.

1000 goals, he finished with 894 and wasn't much of a goal scoring threat even before the injury so that's really a stretch.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:47 PM
  #316
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Only on "Planet Hardy" is 31-41 goals in a season considered "not much of a goal scoring threat"

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:47 PM
  #317
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I really don't know what the decline is your are talking about. When I think of a post 1988 Gretzky I use the word "decline" with quotations. He wins the Hart trophy and we are saying he is in the decline with 168 points? I'll say this, Gretzky's "decline" is far superior to a normal HHOF player's BEST season!
It's still a decline for Wayne after his 5 year peak of averaging over 200 points per season (82-86), 64 game season then a dip down to 168 points.



Quote:
Not true. Starting in 1989 he has a slight drop in overall points with 168 in comparison to 149 (186 projected). Then 142 and then 163. Then after the Suter hit he drops to 121, is a minus player for the first time in his 13 year career.

ES points:
1989 - 100
1990 - 96
1991 - 103
1992 - 63.....................

Come on, you don't see a difference here? It is practically slapping you in the face. His point totals were rather stagnant the pre-Suter time he was in L.A. It is clear he had a slight drop in points since his Oiler years, but in all honesty, what the heck is the point here? Hardy, I want to ask you that? What is the point trying to be made here? Gretzky was clearly a different player after 1991. Even though the stats support this as clear as day I can tell you that from watching him at that time. He was still a great player, but post 1991 was a huge turning point as to when we saw him go from embarassing the league to merely just being an Art Ross threat - all in one year.

To me there is Oilers Gretzky, early Kings Gretzky and post Suter Gretzky. That post Suter Gretzky lasted up until the end of his career. But he aged and got slower and less dangerous, as is the case with anyone.

I showed you that chart as to just how normal it is for an all-time great player - even Lemieux - to have a drop in his ES totals and rely a little bit more on the power play. You aren't exactly coming up with some revelation that wasn't already there.

Phil you are still only focused on the ES scoring, like the amount of ESGA don't matter or the ratio.

We have already established that Wayne's scoring declined at a slower rate than his overall effectiveness as a player at ES.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:52 PM
  #318
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Only on "Planet Hardy" is 31-41 goals in a season considered "not much of a goal scoring threat"
Okay compared to his peak, which I'm pretty sure you knew, as the last time he finished top 10 in goals was in 89.

An extra 104 goals over that last 8 seasons is really a huge stretch, don't you agree?

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 08:54 PM
  #319
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Okay compared to his peak, which I'm pretty sure you knew, as the last time he finished top 10 in goals was in 89.

An extra 104 goals over that last 8 seasons is really a huge stretch, don't you agree?
I'm well aware of what Gretzky's peak run was. Now please explain how 31-41 goals in a season constitutes (in your words) "not much of a goal scoring threat".

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:37 PM
  #320
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
I'm well aware of what Gretzky's peak run was. Now please explain how 31-41 goals in a season constitutes (in your words) "not much of a goal scoring threat".
I just did in the last post, it would be nice if you actually read the psoot before scroign points to the gallery.

Now explain how Wayne was going to get those extra 104 goals.

i mean he scored 38 after the injury in 94, the misrepresentation of the injury is getting even greater than Wayne ever was.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:40 PM
  #321
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I just did in the last post, it would be nice if you actually read the psoot before scroign points to the gallery.

Now explain how Wayne was going to get those extra 104 goals.

i mean he scored 38 after the injury in 94, the misrepresentation of the injury is getting even greater than Wayne ever was.
No you didn't. You hemmed and hawed and gave the "well for Gretzky....." routine. That doesn't feed the bulldog. Either he is a goal scoring threat or he is not. You claimed he wasn't a scoring threat anymore. Defend that comment or retract it. Don't try to spin it because neither I nor anyone else is buying the spin.

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:43 PM
  #322
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
It was still quite the drop off in 88 in the plus/minus department from his previous peak. Since Overpass was quite careful, rightfully so IMO, not to put too much importance in a single season we can conclude the 89 and 90 continued drop off was probably already occurring in 88.

These things aren't absolutes, they are probabilities, at least if one looks at them objectively. If one is absolute when they is conflicting evidence then they are on shaky ground.

The funny thing about the injury is that if one looks at the entire statistical record for Wayne, it's really hard to pick out when the devastating injury took place.

I mean he lead the league in scoring in 93, and had a decent playoff too, and in assists in 97 and 98.

The hit occurred and he might have aged the same way if it hadn't, it's something we don't know.





to the bolded part, you only want to look at one part of the even strength equation, the scoring points part, which I ahve stated continusioulsy he was still elite.

His overall effectiveness at ES wasn't elite any more though as we can see by his ESGF/ESGA ratio which had dipped down to 1.13 and 1.14 respectively in 89 and 90.

I can go back and look and maybe someone has numbers in a file for those 2 seasons but pretty sure there were many players with a better ratio than Wayne.
Whatever ounce of credibility you were working with now has officially left the discussion. Wayne won a scoring title and a playoff scoring title after the injury, but now he was winning the scoring title by 10 points rather than by 30. It's a testament to how great a player he was before the Gary Suter hit that he was still able to win a regular season and playoff scoring title as a shadow of his former (pre-Suter) self.

tazzy19 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:15 PM
  #323
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
No you didn't. You hemmed and hawed and gave the "well for Gretzky....." routine. That doesn't feed the bulldog. Either he is a goal scoring threat or he is not. You claimed he wasn't a scoring threat anymore. Defend that comment or retract it. Don't try to spin it because neither I nor anyone else is buying the spin.
Wayne was a Luc Robitaille elite like in 90 with 40 goals good for 17th in the NHL.

His 41 in 91 were good for 13th so pretty sure top 10 elite finishes were behind him.

Also he scored 31 and 38 goals in 2 of the first 3 seasons after the devastating hit, it's really hard to imagine him scoring an extra 104 to hit 1000.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:21 PM
  #324
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Wayne was a Luc Robitaille elite like in 90 with 40 goals good for 17th in the NHL.

His 41 in 91 were good for 13th so pretty sure top 10 elite finishes were behind him.

Also he scored 31 and 38 goals in 2 of the first 3 seasons after the devastating hit, it's really hard to imagine him scoring an extra 104 to hit 1000.
You're exact words were >>>>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
and wasn't much of a goal scoring threat even before the injury so that's really a stretch.
Now, before the injury Gretzky was scoring in the 31-41 goals a season range.

I'm going to ask you again: Was Gretzky or was Gretzky NOT much of a goal scoring threat before the injury? This isn't hard and does not require spin or hemming and hawing: Are you claiming that 31-41 goals in a season is not a goal scoring threat? Answer the freaking question already!

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:24 PM
  #325
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzy19 View Post
Whatever ounce of credibility you were working with now has officially left the discussion. Wayne won a scoring title and a playoff scoring title after the injury, but now he was winning the scoring title by 10 points rather than by 30. It's a testament to how great a player he was before the Gary Suter hit that he was still able to win a regular season and playoff scoring title as a shadow of his former (pre-Suter) self.
how exactly can you prove that it wasn't natural aging that occured.

His PPG went down at age 26-27(86 and 87) from 2.60 plus in 4 of 5 seasons in his peak to 2.32 and 2.33, then went down again

89 28 2.15
90 29 1.95
91 30 2.09 then injury
92 31 1.64
93 32 1.44
94 33 1.60

that i even question that maybe he was already aging and to quote you,

Quote:
Whatever ounce of credibility you were working with now has officially left the discussion
Is not supported by the actual stats Wayne had leading up to the injury.

I'm not going to question your credibility or the actual weight of it but your perception of Wayne seems to be more than he actually was.

It's pretty clear there was already a scoring decline in 87-88 then another one in the 3 years before the injury.

Hardyvan123 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 03:43 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.