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
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Why isn't Wayne Gretzky a 4-time Conn Smythe Trophy winner?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-06-2013, 04:29 PM
  #51
#66
Registered User
 
#66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 11,371
vCash: 500
If anyone deserved more Conn Smyths its Bossy. Jesus those numbers are insane.

#66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2013, 05:03 PM
  #52
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 990
vCash: 500
So Gretzky outscored Messier even without the blowout points, with 25 points coming in tie games or games within 1 goal, and another 4 in 2-goal games. That's not quite this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
It's more like an extra one-two goals from Gretzky in every blowout when Messier stops looking to pile it on offensively and starts looking to pile it on physically.
Furthermore, while Messier did a great job physically, he was not the sole cause of the Islanders being worn down and shouldn't get ALL the credit.



I also don't see how 4 points in 4 games is Gretzky "easily contained" while 6 points in 5 games is Gretzky running around with lots of Messier-created empty space. A lot of the difference seems to be Billy Smith making some very good stops in 1983 that he was no longer making in in 1984.



As for points while trailing, it's silly to say "Messier should win the Conn Smythe because was the go-to-guy when they were down" because that amounts to "Messier should win the Conn Smythe because he scored 4 points from behind in a loss to Calgary in the 2nd round."

Messier's lead (and 33% of his points from behind) comes from a single game - Game 5 vs Calgary where he scored 4 points in a 5-4 loss. Admirable performance, but it's of little value, as is outscoring Gretzky 8-4 in losses.

And why pay so much attention to points while trailing? Gretzky's 9-3 advantage in go-ahead points gives him the lead in tied or trailing 17-15. In wins, that goes to 13-7.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-06-2013, 05:16 PM
  #53
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Gretzky had multipoint games in each of the first 4 games against the Flyers with 9 total points in those so he was clearly finding a way to produce against the Flyers with the concussion scoring at least as much in each of those games as he did in the entire series against the Wings

It seems pretty clear from what the media and Gretzky was saying about Detroit's play style in the conference finals, the clutching and grabbing D focused on him by Detroit seems to be the main reason why he wasnt scoring. The other thing seems to be that there were chances that just werent finished on which happens.
It does happen, but it wasn't any one player's checking though. And if the concussion didn't matter, why didn't those idiot Red Wings play the same way in 1988 when a healthy Gretzky got at least 2 points in each game?

As for the Flyers series, Gretzky's 11 points in 7 games was good, but not quite what you'd expect. He also only had multi-point games in 3 of the 4 games. I believe HSP is wrong on Game 3's assist on Anderson's goal, otherwise Gretzky tied the Finals scoring record (12) one year before he actually broke it in 1988 (with 13). But since all the record books say he had 11 points in 7 games, I go with that.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 09:32 AM
  #54
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 5,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
So Gretzky outscored Messier even without the blowout points, with 25 points coming in tie games or games within 1 goal, and another 4 in 2-goal games.
Since when is the burden to show that Messier outscored Gretzky? Messier already won the Conn Smythe Trophy. The burden is to show that Gretzky provided more overall value than Mark Messier. Gretzky's nine-point lead that inspired this thread was shown to be inflated a full four-points by blowout games (scoring when the Oilers were already up by 3+), and we have a quote from their own teammate saying that Messier switches up how he plays in blowout games:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sports Illustrated, 1985
In Game 1 Messier hurt Chicago defenseman Keith Brown, hitting him with a clean crunching check that put Brown into the boards and out of the playoffs with a hip pointer. "He won't score in the blowouts," said Lowe after Messier failed to get a goal in the 11-2 Game 1 Oiler shootout, "but he and Gretz are the guys we look to when the game is close."
It's the weight of nine points (five truly valuable, four not so much) against everything that Messier could do that Gretzky could not. For instance:

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
Furthermore, while Messier did a great job physically, he was not the sole cause of the Islanders being worn down and shouldn't get ALL the credit.
It certainly wasn't Gretzky contributing to Oilers' physicality. And again, when did I claim that Messier was the only scorer, only checker, etc. for the Oilers? We're discussing Gretzky/Messier rather exclusively, are we not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Coffey
Mark hit Denis Potvin on the goal line just to the right of their net, and at that time when you hit Denis Potvin you just went down. We were all, "Wow, yeah, yeah." It really brought your emotion up. We said "Hey, we can play with these guys." Because up to that point the Islanders were so superior to our hockey club.
Physicality. They aren't exactly lining up to write ballads about blowout goals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
I also don't see how 4 points in 4 games is Gretzky "easily contained" while 6 points in 5 games is Gretzky running around with lots of Messier-created empty space. A lot of the difference seems to be Billy Smith making some very good stops in 1983 that he was no longer making in in 1984.
Maybe you missed the memo, but Wayne Gretzky didn't score a goal against the Islanders in 1983, and didn't bury one until Games 4 and 5 of 1984 (when he collected all but one of his points). It wasn't The Wayne Gretzky Show until the Islanders were bruised and the floodgates were opening on Smith - the exact moment for the latter coming from one of Messier's goals in Game 3.

I know you liked to describe that goal as just another one of the "4 of Messier's points [that] came in the 7-2 blowouts where every Oilers line was putting the puck past Smith," but I think the Oilers do a slightly better job:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Fogolin
It really took the wind out of their sails. You could tell. They were just deflated. They sagged.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Gretzky
It really took our team to a level of confidence where we never looked back.
Honestly, when you under-cut Messier's offense in the Finals, are you any less guilty of poor phrasing than I am? You're dogging me for equating controlling Gretzky with keeping him from scoring goals. Acting like Messier's goal in Game 3 was no different than the 7th goal of that same 7-2 game and deserved no extra commentary is a little worse, don't you think?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
As for points while trailing, it's silly to say "Messier should win the Conn Smythe because was the go-to-guy when they were down" because that amounts to "Messier should win the Conn Smythe because he scored 4 points from behind in a loss to Calgary in the 2nd round."

Messier's lead (and 33% of his points from behind) comes from a single game - Game 5 vs Calgary where he scored 4 points in a 5-4 loss. Admirable performance, but it's of little value, as is outscoring Gretzky 8-4 in losses.
Hey, it wasn't just the one game against Calgary. Messier scored a full seven points to help the Oilers come back in games against Calgary where they eventually lost - sending the game to overtime twice, and helping them climb to a one-goal loss in another (6-5, 5-4, 5-4).

Gee, I bet that's a high-percentage too - but wait? WHY IS THIS A BAD THING? Because it didn't directly contribute to their 4 wins? I could see that if he's the guy celebrating the single goal at the end of a 7-1 rout, but instead, he was the player making the biggest push to tie the score against their rivals in three separate games - games that the Oilers could have won.

Here's the kicker: You may remember Messier's star performances in losses in the Flames series, because in-between the sweeps of Winnipeg and Minnesota, it was the only time the Oilers faced real adversity during their Stanley Cup run (besides Game 7, where Messier injured three different Flames - or Game 3 of the Finals, where Messier scored that one goal to tie the game that Wayne Gretzky said gave the team confidence, yada yada yada).

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
And why pay so much attention to points while trailing? Gretzky's 9-3 advantage in go-ahead points gives him the lead in tied or trailing 17-15. In wins, that goes to 13-7.
Another chapter in our saga of who can give the statsheet different context? With respect to Gretzky's lead in go-ahead points, I don't know that the Oilers were worried that they would get tied to death, but assuming we give points when trailing and points when tied equal weight (don't get me wrong, points when tied are worth a hell of a lot more than points when up by three), we have your 17-15 number with a two point edge for Gretzky. Messier injured more people than that.

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 11:45 AM
  #55
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
So essentially Mark Messier won the Conn Smythe Trophy based on how many players he injured? (Just want to be sure.)

tazzy19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:17 PM
  #56
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
I think that's being missed a little by the, 'well, they just wanted to give it to someone other than Gretzky' crowd.

In 1984, Gretzky had 35 points in 19 games. Messier had 26 in the same number of games.

That works out to roughly an extra point from Gretzky every two games. But in exchange, Messier was giving you tougher minutes, clutch scoring, a far superior defensive presence, and a bruising physical game.

The point at which those 'intangibles' start to outweigh the extra scoring is subjective, but its certainly not unreasonable to say that Messier had surpassed it in 1984.
When comparing players, it's generally stated as the "consensus opinion" that a PPG player like Datsyuk/Zetterberg/Toews, who also offers elite defensive play is not a better player than a defensive liability like Stamkos, who scores maybe 15-20 more points in an 80 game season.

That's a ~20% increase in scoring, for those keeping up.

Gretzky was 35% higher than Messier. Gretzky has ALWAYS been better defensively than Stamkos. And Messier's physical/defensive game circa 1984 at BEST a wash with Datsyuk, Zetterberg, or Toews.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Gretzky had multipoint games in each of the first 4 games against the Flyers with 9 total points in those so he was clearly finding a way to produce against the Flyers with the concussion scoring at least as much in each of those games as he did in the entire series against the Wings

It seems pretty clear from what the media and Gretzky was saying about Detroit's play style in the conference finals, the clutching and grabbing D focused on him by Detroit seems to be the main reason why he wasnt scoring. The other thing seems to be that there were chances that just werent finished on which happens.

i went ahead and watched all 4 highlight vids and took notes on the lineups on each shift shown. It doesnt seem to be as you say at all. Despite the fact that these are highlights and so Gretzky's line would certainly be featured less than Messier's line proportional to the entire games since the latter was so much more productive it doesnt seem that Yzerman was matched with Messier much more than Gretzky at all.

Game 2:
First minute and half was two fights couldnt really see who was on ice for first fight but second one had Burr's line on and no Gretzky (looked like Messier skated in later) as it said "along over the boards comes 99" after fights
Around 1:55 they have Burr taking draw from Messier while Gretzky is on the ice and then making a change while the Messier skates up and scores. It was Yzerman who changed for Burr while Gretzky was on the ice...
The next shift shows Yzerman's line against the Oilers checking line. The commentators actually say that Demers had chances to take Yzerman's line off against Krushelnyski but kept him on so...
Next shift is Gretzky on the PK against the Wings top PP which is the same thing as their top line and they score a SH goal.
Next is Kocur/McSorley fight and cant see who is on ice.
Next is Probert's PP goal with Detroit top PP against Messier/Kurri PK.
Next shift shown at 6:50 is Yzerman's line against Gretzky's where Delorme goes into Edmonton bench.
Next shift shown at 8:00 is Yzerman's line against Messier's where Messier scores with 1:30 left.
Right after that shift Yzerman stays out against Edmonton's checking line.
After that shows Yzerman's line still out there against the Edmonton checking line scoring an EN goal.
Last seconds of game show Yzerman's line out there against the 4th line for Edmonton?

Game 3:
First shift shown is Oates line against what seems like a mishmash of Oilers Krushelnyski/McSorley/Tikkanen.
Next is McTavish's goal against what looks like Burr's line.
Next is Yzerman's line and i cant tell who the forwards are for the Oilers.
Next is Gretzky's line against Burr's line.
Next shows where Messier and Gretzky on the ice are talking to the ref and you can see Yzerman on the ice as well.
Next is Yzerman's line against Gretzky's line on the Wings no goal play.
Next is Probert's goal. The Yzerman line is out there against the Gretzky line.
Next is Yzerman's line making a play and i see Anderson on with the backcheck.
Then the announcers say "you know what theyve done to this man" referring to Gretzky.
Next is Oates line against Gretzky's line without Gretzky as McTavish is centering.
Next is a scrum with Burr's line out against Gretzky.
Next is the McSorley goal. Burr line on for Detroit and 4th line on for Oilers.

Game 4:
Cant see much of who is on during first shown shifts with elbows, looks like Kocur hit Messier before he hit Fuhr going to bench?
The first goal starting around 1:50 shows Messier's wingers without Messier against Yzerman and Gallant but not Probert. Detroit had just made a line change.
Next Burr scores and it looks like Messier and Anderson are on.
Next Gallant scores though Yzerman isnt on but Oates/Ashton. McTavish is the only forward i can tell for Oilers.
Next is the Messier line scoring against Burr's line.
Next is Gretzky on but not with Kurri/Tikkanen but with Krushelnyski scoring against Burr's line. The announcers say this is an example of Gretzky being doubleshifted.
Immediately after at 5:30 is Yzerman facing off against Messier.
Then the announcers talk about how Gretzky only had 1 assist (2 counting the game) so far and how it is difficult to play against Detroit's teamstyle, referring to congestion here.
Next is Oates and Klima against the Oilers checking line.
Next is the announcers talking about Gretzky's nose on the bench while the Wing's top line faces off against some line without Gretzky obv.
Next is the announcers saying Tikkanen not on bench and Krushelnyski played on Gretzky's LW last shift.
The last 20 seconds is Yzerman facing off against Messier. Gretzky was shown on the bench. Lines seem different Hunter is on for Oilers while Klima is on for Red Wings.
Gretzky's interview has him saying that the Wings playing defensive clutch and grab style game. He was surprised in his own team's D. He says that he felt he was playing well enough though not scoring and cant be too critical of himself.

Game 5:
First shift shown is Wings top line scoring on PP against Hunter/McTavish.
Next is Coffey scoring. Yzerman is on the ice as against Anderson/Kurri. Third F on the left is hard to tell. Doesnt look like Gretzky/Messier. Nilsson?
Next Ashton scores as Oates line out against Gretzky line.
Next shows Gallant's shot on Fuhr. Krushelnyski is only Oiler F i can see. Yzerman was on ice.
Next is the announcers taking about Sather switching Gretzky as needed before he faces off against Yzerman and his line. Gretzky is playing with Krushelnyski.
After talking about hockey sticks they show Gretzky on the bench and Yzerman on ice for a faceoff.
Next is Burr who might have changed and Ashton/Higgins out there against McTavish's line.
Next is Yzerman's goal. Doesnt look like he is on his regular line skating with Ashton/Klima. Gretzky is on the ice with Krushelnyski.
Next is the MacTavish line scoring while Yzerman/Klima/Higgins? are on.
Next is the Gallant shot that hurts Fuhr. You hear Kurri by the announcers and it looks like Anderson is the guy who takes a swing at Yzerman when he starts out from his own zone. Cant tell if thats Gretzky getting tackled in front?
Next is Messier's goal where it is Messier's line out against Yzerman's line.
Next is Messier's goal where it is Messier's line out against Burr's line.
Next is Smith's EN goal. Yzerman/Messier lines on the ice.
Next is Nilsson's EN goal. Messier's line is out. I see Klima/Gallant cant tell the other Detroit Fs.

The 87 Red Wings played a tight defensive style that continued in the playoffs and kept all 4 losses against the Oilers close, late/EN goals make the scores in game 2 and 5 look much more lopsided. And Yzerman was certainly a big part of that team style and this is documented.

He did it despite a Red Wings' commitment to a strict defensive style that limits scoring opportunities.

"We're going to play the same style, try to check and check and wait for our breaks," said Detroit captain Steve Yzerman, the man credited with doing most of the work to keep Edmonton's Wayne Gretzky away from the goal on Tuesday.

Steve Yzerman was paired up against the Oilers' Wayne Gretzky.
Thanks for doing this; I was about ready to go through and do this and then saw your post.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:18 PM
  #57
vadim sharifijanov
thanks chris
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
[long, well thought out post containing many points that are worthy of debate]
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazzy19 View Post
[responds to the very last point, willfully misrepresents it, ignores the rest]
____

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 01:50 PM
  #58
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
____
I asked an honest question, for clarification. I would rather not debate without first understanding one of the key points. I think that's more than fair, wouldn't you agree?

tazzy19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 08:20 PM
  #59
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Gretzky had multipoint games in each of the first 4 games against the Flyers with 9 total points in those so he was clearly finding a way to produce against the Flyers with the concussion scoring at least as much in each of those games as he did in the entire series against the Wings

It seems pretty clear from what the media and Gretzky was saying about Detroit's play style in the conference finals, the clutching and grabbing D focused on him by Detroit seems to be the main reason why he wasnt scoring. The other thing seems to be that there were chances that just werent finished on which happens.



i went ahead and watched all 4 highlight vids and took notes on the lineups on each shift shown. It doesnt seem to be as you say at all. Despite the fact that these are highlights and so Gretzky's line would certainly be featured less than Messier's line proportional to the entire games since the latter was so much more productive it doesnt seem that Yzerman was matched with Messier much more than Gretzky at all.

Game 2:
First minute and half was two fights couldnt really see who was on ice for first fight but second one had Burr's line on and no Gretzky (looked like Messier skated in later) as it said "along over the boards comes 99" after fights
Around 1:55 they have Burr taking draw from Messier while Gretzky is on the ice and then making a change while the Messier skates up and scores. It was Yzerman who changed for Burr while Gretzky was on the ice...
The next shift shows Yzerman's line against the Oilers checking line. The commentators actually say that Demers had chances to take Yzerman's line off against Krushelnyski but kept him on so...
Next shift is Gretzky on the PK against the Wings top PP which is the same thing as their top line and they score a SH goal.
Next is Kocur/McSorley fight and cant see who is on ice.
Next is Probert's PP goal with Detroit top PP against Messier/Kurri PK.
Next shift shown at 6:50 is Yzerman's line against Gretzky's where Delorme goes into Edmonton bench.
Next shift shown at 8:00 is Yzerman's line against Messier's where Messier scores with 1:30 left.
Right after that shift Yzerman stays out against Edmonton's checking line.
After that shows Yzerman's line still out there against the Edmonton checking line scoring an EN goal.
Last seconds of game show Yzerman's line out there against the 4th line for Edmonton?

Game 3:
First shift shown is Oates line against what seems like a mishmash of Oilers Krushelnyski/McSorley/Tikkanen.
Next is McTavish's goal against what looks like Burr's line.
Next is Yzerman's line and i cant tell who the forwards are for the Oilers.
Next is Gretzky's line against Burr's line.
Next shows where Messier and Gretzky on the ice are talking to the ref and you can see Yzerman on the ice as well.
Next is Yzerman's line against Gretzky's line on the Wings no goal play.
Next is Probert's goal. The Yzerman line is out there against the Gretzky line.
Next is Yzerman's line making a play and i see Anderson on with the backcheck.
Then the announcers say "you know what theyve done to this man" referring to Gretzky.
Next is Oates line against Gretzky's line without Gretzky as McTavish is centering.
Next is a scrum with Burr's line out against Gretzky.
Next is the McSorley goal. Burr line on for Detroit and 4th line on for Oilers.

Game 4:
Cant see much of who is on during first shown shifts with elbows, looks like Kocur hit Messier before he hit Fuhr going to bench?
The first goal starting around 1:50 shows Messier's wingers without Messier against Yzerman and Gallant but not Probert. Detroit had just made a line change.
Next Burr scores and it looks like Messier and Anderson are on.
Next Gallant scores though Yzerman isnt on but Oates/Ashton. McTavish is the only forward i can tell for Oilers.
Next is the Messier line scoring against Burr's line.
Next is Gretzky on but not with Kurri/Tikkanen but with Krushelnyski scoring against Burr's line. The announcers say this is an example of Gretzky being doubleshifted.
Immediately after at 5:30 is Yzerman facing off against Messier.
Then the announcers talk about how Gretzky only had 1 assist (2 counting the game) so far and how it is difficult to play against Detroit's teamstyle, referring to congestion here.
Next is Oates and Klima against the Oilers checking line.
Next is the announcers talking about Gretzky's nose on the bench while the Wing's top line faces off against some line without Gretzky obv.
Next is the announcers saying Tikkanen not on bench and Krushelnyski played on Gretzky's LW last shift.
The last 20 seconds is Yzerman facing off against Messier. Gretzky was shown on the bench. Lines seem different Hunter is on for Oilers while Klima is on for Red Wings.
Gretzky's interview has him saying that the Wings playing defensive clutch and grab style game. He was surprised in his own team's D. He says that he felt he was playing well enough though not scoring and cant be too critical of himself.

Game 5:
First shift shown is Wings top line scoring on PP against Hunter/McTavish.
Next is Coffey scoring. Yzerman is on the ice as against Anderson/Kurri. Third F on the left is hard to tell. Doesnt look like Gretzky/Messier. Nilsson?
Next Ashton scores as Oates line out against Gretzky line.
Next shows Gallant's shot on Fuhr. Krushelnyski is only Oiler F i can see. Yzerman was on ice.
Next is the announcers taking about Sather switching Gretzky as needed before he faces off against Yzerman and his line. Gretzky is playing with Krushelnyski.
After talking about hockey sticks they show Gretzky on the bench and Yzerman on ice for a faceoff.
Next is Burr who might have changed and Ashton/Higgins out there against McTavish's line.
Next is Yzerman's goal. Doesnt look like he is on his regular line skating with Ashton/Klima. Gretzky is on the ice with Krushelnyski.
Next is the MacTavish line scoring while Yzerman/Klima/Higgins? are on.
Next is the Gallant shot that hurts Fuhr. You hear Kurri by the announcers and it looks like Anderson is the guy who takes a swing at Yzerman when he starts out from his own zone. Cant tell if thats Gretzky getting tackled in front?
Next is Messier's goal where it is Messier's line out against Yzerman's line.
Next is Messier's goal where it is Messier's line out against Burr's line.
Next is Smith's EN goal. Yzerman/Messier lines on the ice.
Next is Nilsson's EN goal. Messier's line is out. I see Klima/Gallant cant tell the other Detroit Fs.

The 87 Red Wings played a tight defensive style that continued in the playoffs and kept all 4 losses against the Oilers close, late/EN goals make the scores in game 2 and 5 look much more lopsided. And Yzerman was certainly a big part of that team style and this is documented.

He did it despite a Red Wings' commitment to a strict defensive style that limits scoring opportunities.

"We're going to play the same style, try to check and check and wait for our breaks," said Detroit captain Steve Yzerman, the man credited with doing most of the work to keep Edmonton's Wayne Gretzky away from the goal on Tuesday.

Steve Yzerman was paired up against the Oilers' Wayne Gretzky.
Good Summary. Ill do you a favor and upload the entire games 2, 4 and 5 when I get time. Wish I could upload all 5, but the three games I mentioned at the start of this thread are the only three I have that I can convert from VHS to digital media. Is a bit of a hassle and takes a lot of time.

In all 3 of those games, Burr was the primary checking center assigned to Gretzky(incidentally, Burr was also the guy assigned to Savard vs the blackhawks. I have 2 of that series as well). Gretzky, Messier and Yzerman all double shift a ton in this series so they will frequently hit the ice together in line mishmashes. But in all the games when playing from behind, The Yzerman line is the line looking to get them back in the game and opening up offensively.

They actually tried getting Burr to Check Messier as well while he was on his game, but he literally shrugged off all attempts and ran them over. Demers and Yzerman even comment on it post game(I think game 5) about how Burr was able to knock Gretzky off his game a bit because he is a finesse player, while Messier just bulled through him or shrugged him off.

All of your newspaper articles are for game 1, which I do not have, but ill respond to them anyways. Yes, Detroit was playing a more defensive style at the time. However, whenever they were down a goal, there was a certain someone they always let off his leash to take risks and get them back in the game. See, all the other games in the series.

The Article you linked which points out Yzerman and Gretzky went head to head in game 1 also points out the manner in which it was done. Which was not some 1 man containment job as Eva implied. Not even remotely close. The article specifically states that every time Gretzky was on the ice, 4 Red wings would line up at the blue line, and clutch, grab, hook and slow down buying time until the 1 wing retrieving the puck could dump it the length of the ice because "not many goals are scored from 180 feet". Gallant went on to comment "it won it for us. We know we can't skate with that team. If icing the puck 30-40 times a game gets us to the stanley cup final, then well do it." It also mentions how they virtually gave up trying to score when they were up a goal.

In any case, It will take time and I have a few games requested to be transferred first but ill get them up eventually. They tell the tale.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 08:39 PM
  #60
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,986
vCash: 500
I am exceptionally disheartened right now. I just realized google video no longer exists and all of the videos in my sticky thread in this section that I spent a large chunk of time uploading are now defunct and need to be uploaded to another media site. Thank god I only had to convert some of them from VHS once since I still have them on digital media.

Can someone suggest a Media site that allows for 3hr + long videos and will not make legal hassles like those I faced in the past?

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-07-2013, 09:20 PM
  #61
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Since when is the burden to show that Messier outscored Gretzky?
Points came up because I didn't think it was an appropriate characterization of Gretzky's points to say the lead is "an extra one-two goals from Gretzky in every blowout"

Quote:
It certainly wasn't Gretzky contributing to Oilers' physicality. And again, when did I claim that Messier was the only scorer, only checker, etc. for the Oilers? We're discussing Gretzky/Messier rather exclusively, are we not?
You did say "Gretzky had more room to score goals because Messier was checking Trottier instead of Trottier checking Gretzky the entire series." The Oilers were very physical and Messier was a leader in this regard, but I think it's taking it too far to say Gretzky's goal scoring was the product of the Isles being banged up by Mark Messier.


Quote:
Physicality. They aren't exactly lining up to write ballads about blowout goals.
Well there were only 5 of those points.

The Oilers and the voters were noticing the thing they were perceived to be lacking before, (even though they weren't exactly soft in 1983, they just lost to a team that was better.) Had the storyline said that the Oilers were a physical team completely unable to create scoring chances they'd be more appreciative of the offense.

But with Edmonton the offense was seen as a given. Yes, Gretzky scored some goals, but that's to be expected. Like a real-life election, voters are influenced by expectations. They look at Wayne Gretzky vs Wayne Gretzky's expectations and Mark Messier vs. Mark Messier's expectations, and found that Messier excelled with the easier matchup.

Quote:
Maybe you missed the memo, but Wayne Gretzky didn't score a goal against the Islanders in 1983, and didn't bury one until Games 4 and 5 of 1984 (when he collected all but one of his points). It wasn't The Wayne Gretzky Show until the Islanders were bruised and the floodgates were opening on Smith - the exact moment for the latter coming from one of Messier's goals in Game 3.
Quote:
Honestly, when you under-cut Messier's offense in the Finals, are you any less guilty of poor phrasing than I am? You're dogging me for equating controlling Gretzky with keeping him from scoring goals. Acting like Messier's goal in Game 3 was no different than the 7th goal of that same 7-2 game and deserved no extra commentary is a little worse, don't you think?
I am always guilty of poor phrasing.

So perhaps we should stop adding to our statsheet saga. I understand what you're trying to do with points when trailing, but has anyone else ever tried to use that argument for any other Conn Smythe? If no one else cares about this, why are we talking about it?

Gretzky's points being the go-ahead points in wins is more relevant given the Krejci-Bergeron discussion in this thread, because Gretzky was coming up with the "Bergeron" goals. It's not a bad thing that Mess got goals in losses, but it's a good thing that Gretzky scored three points on the first five goals in a 7-4 win in Game 7. Messier also had an impact (or three), but I've alway been under the impression that the trophies go to the guys who impact scoreboard rather than the opposition's medical bills. Which is why they were discussing Krejci and Bergeron for scoring, and no one mentioned Zdeno Chara as a candidate for punching a 0-point Sidney Crosby in the face.

The first quote probably illustrates the disconnect between us. I don't see the need to credit Messier for every goal that happened after his first one. If the series ends with the Wayne Gretzky Show, I would prefer to give credit to Gretzky for taking over a game they may not have won without him, and even give him credit for setting up the game winner, although I also missed the memo where game-winners are less valuable when you're up 2-0 (off of two Gretzky goals) and didn't know it was valuable yet.

In short, you give more credit to Messier for opening the floodgates, I give more credit to Gretzky for being the flood.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:10 PM
  #62
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jafar View Post
Another vote for Bergeron ahead of Krejci here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I personally preferred Bergeron too, beginning in game 7 of round 1. His points seemed to be of the more timely variety. It's not really an "offensive advantage" if the extra points are being piled up when they're not badly needed.
In 2010 I was a little skeptical about Bergeron being on the Olympic team when we could have thrown in Stamkos or even more scoring like St. Louis. However, when he is on the team in 2014 - and I mean WHEN - no one will question it. If that means someone like Staal or Getzlaf can't make the team down the middle then so be it. There is no way Bergeron is left off the 2014 team.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 01:12 PM
  #63
vadim sharifijanov
thanks chris
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
In 2010 I was a little skeptical about Bergeron being on the Olympic team when we could have thrown in Stamkos or even more scoring like St. Louis. However, when he is on the team in 2014 - and I mean WHEN - no one will question it. If that means someone like Staal or Getzlaf can't make the team down the middle then so be it. There is no way Bergeron is left off the 2014 team.
depending on whether/how he heals from his laundry list of ailments incurred during this year's playoffs.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2013, 09:30 PM
  #64
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
depending on whether/how he heals from his laundry list of ailments incurred during this year's playoffs.
Right, that's a given. But for centers, Canada had Crosby, Toews as locks. After that I would think most of Bergeron, Stamkos, Staal, Getzlaf and Tavares get in even if there is a shift to the wing. But I'm not sure if all get in. But by now it has to be obvious that if healthy, Bergeron is a mortal lock on that team. He just never plays a bad game and does so many things well.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 04:20 AM
  #65
Giotrapani91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 171
vCash: 500
Here's how I would've picked the 1980s decade conn smythe winners 1980 trottier, 1981 potvin, over goring, 1982 bossy no duh, 1983 bob Bourne over smith, 1984 Gretzky, over messier, 85 Gretzky, would be my main pick but I'd have to vote for Coffey, and Kurri, as well. 1986 Patrick Roy would be my main guy only cuz his GAA was really good but cuz he was only a rookie Mats naslund is my second in line. 1987 messier, or Anderson, over hextall, 1988 Gretzky 1989 maccinis, or Mullen, and maybe Vernon being in my top 3

Giotrapani91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 04:41 AM
  #66
ozzie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
For people who didn't experience the 80's and Gretzky's domination, he was a victim of his own success. It got so ridiculous, anyone remember Hockey Pools where Gretzky's points were divided into Assists and Goals?

He kept breaking records, winning everything you could win, year after year. Only his WHA experience robbed him of a Calder. Smith's own goal derailed the train for a year, who knows what would have been.

Voter fatigue was a huge thing for Gretzky, when your the best people start to turn on you a bit, its natural. It's like Dynasties, people eventually rebel against empires.

I honestly don't know how many more Smythe's he should have won, but if he had 4, I doubt you could argue against him deserving them, how could you?

ozzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 10:54 AM
  #67
The Panther
Registered User
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 3,597
vCash: 500
Messier totally deserved the Conn Smythe in 1984 -- why are we even having this discussion? And last time I checked, 26 points in 19 playoff games while neutralizing the defending champs' best center isn't "just injuring people".

We always have to think about the context of the times, not just the isolated stats for one spring. The 1983 Oilers were much the same line-up (with a few tweaks) as the 1984 Oilers. Edmonton steamrolled every team on the way to the Finals in 1983 -- and I mean steamrolled -- with a furious offensive attack that was unprecedented in NHL history. Gretzky was rolling, with 34 points in 12 games, and everyone thought the Oilers would de-throne New York. Then they ran into Bill Smith in game one in Edmonton -- Gretzky played very well, but couldn't score -- and then lost confidence and the Islanders surged.

For scoring 4 assists in 4 Finals' games, Gretzky was considered a bum and the guy who couldn't get it done in the playoffs (never mind he'd set the all-time record for points in a playoff). I mean, what is 4 assists in the Finals going to get you? (Apparently it gets you the Conn Smythe in 2016...)

So, in 1984, it more of the same, except Edmonton was actually more challenged on the path to the Finals, this time by Calgary, to whom they nearly blew a 3-1 lead. Gretzky was good in game 7, but it was Messier who won it for them -- if you don't believe me, you could have asked Bob Johnson -- and, yes, he did take out three Flames in one game.

So, in the Finals, games 1, 2, and 3, and Gretzky still doesn't have a goal. And in game 3, Messier makes the play of the series that turns the tide. At the moment of his epic goal in game 3, the Islanders were outscoring Edmonton 8-3 in the 1984 Finals. After his goal, Edmonton outscored the Islanders 17-5. And Trottier and Bossy were ineffective. And Potvin was intimidated.


As to Gretzky in 1987... I'm okay with Hextall winning it. That's one of the years when there were about 6 players who were equally deserving. Gretzky was very good in the Finals, though, especially in games 1, 2, and 4. If the Oilers had clinched in game 5 at home (as they were expected to), he might have won it again, but they blew the 3-1 lead and the news-story became, 'Hextall Foils Oilers!', and it was a sexier headline than 'Gretzky wins again'.

Gretzky in '93 was deserving, but you have to give that one to Roy.


Last edited by The Panther: 07-08-2016 at 07:14 PM.
The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 11:08 AM
  #68
The Panther
Registered User
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 3,597
vCash: 500
Oh, as an aside: the Hawerchuk-on-Gretzky thing in 1987 is BRUTAL. I mean, honestly, I think as a kid I lost some respect for Hawerchuk after that, and I'm not sure I've ever gotten it back.

Score is about 3-0 Edmonton in an elimination game, and the play is in Edmonton's end (!) when Hawerchuk grabs Gretzky from behind, unpremeditated, by the head, and body-slams him, head-first, into the ice. I mean, WTF? If I recall, I think the referee missed it. Would be a 20-game suspension today.

The clip of it used to be on YouTube, but the game highlights (I think it was game 4) are missing now. We can see the Oilers' goals in the series:

It's kind of weird to see an Oilers' playoff round in the 80s that Gretzky doesn't dominate.

(As an aside, the goal by Messier at about 4:35 is poetry in motion. God, that man was a force of brutal beauty at times. Thanks to the idiot-NHL for ruling such goals out of the sport now -- you can't possibly beat a goalie with a wicked wrist shot anymore, but you can sometimes score an ugly garbage goal.)

The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 11:26 AM
  #69
vadim sharifijanov
thanks chris
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,375
vCash: 500
i didn't see it so i can't really comment on messier vs gretzky in '84. by legend, i am convinced that it could have gone to either guy.

as for hawerchuk, what you describe is horrendous and now i think i get why you can't appreciate how good he rightfully was. i have often said that gary suter should never ever be even spoken about in the backroom meetings that determine who gets to make the hall of fame due to crimes against hockey. this would also qualify.

even in the heat of battle, there are shameful acts. i don't like to moralize about hockey because come on, it's just sports, but clarke on kharlamov, and that ugly three year run where every year it was a suter on gretzky, a graves on lemieux, a hunter on turgeon, a certain bald guy at the end of game six on trevor linden... cowardly, unsportsmanlike, and i feel like i personally would rather win by beating the guy than cheating.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 03:02 PM
  #70
Giotrapani91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Messier totally deserved the Conn Smythe in 1984 -- why are we even having this discussion? And last time I checked, 26 points in 19 playoff games while neutralizing the defending champs' best center isn't "just injuring people".

We always to think about the context of the times, not just the isolated stats for one spring. The 1983 Oilers were much the same line-up (with a few tweaks) as the 1984 Oilers. Edmonton steamrolled every team on the way to the Finals in 1983 -- and I mean steamrolled -- with a furious offensive attack that was unprecedented in NHL history. Gretzky was rolling, with 34 points in 12 games, and everyone thought the Oilers would de-throne New York. Then they ran into Bill Smith in game one in Edmonton -- Gretzky played very well, but couldn't score -- and then lost confidence and the Islanders surged.

For scoring 4 assists in 4 Finals' games, Gretzky was considered a bum and the guy who couldn't get it done in the playoffs (never mind he'd set the all-time record for points in a playoff). I mean, what is 4 assists in the Finals going to get you? (Apparently it gets you the Conn Smythe in 2016...)

So, in 1984, it more of the same, except Edmonton was actually more challenged on the path to the Finals, this time by Calgary, to whom they nearly blew a 3-1 lead. Gretzky was good in game 7, but it was Messier who won it for them -- if you don't believe me, you could have asked Bob Johnson -- and, yes, he did take out three Flames in one game.

So, in the Finals, games 1, 2, and 3, and Gretzky still doesn't have a goal. And in game 3, Messier makes the play of the series that turns the tide. At the moment of his epic goal in game 3, the Islanders were outscoring Edmonton 8-3 in the 1984 Finals. After his goal, Edmonton outscored the Islanders 17-5. And Trottier and Bossy were ineffective. And Potvin was intimidated.


As to Gretzky in 1987... I'm okay with Hextall winning it. That's one of the years when there were about 6 players who were equally deserving. Gretzky was very good in the Finals, though, especially in games 1, 2, and 4. If the Oilers had clinched in game 5 at home (as they were expected to), he might have won it again, but they blew the 3-1 lead and the news-story became, 'Hextall Foils Oilers!', and it was a sexier headline than 'Gretzky wins again'.

Gretzky in '93 was deserving, but you have to give that one to Roy.
not sounding biased here panther but hextall only won the trophy for two reasons one he carried the flyers to game 7, and 2 the loss of pelle Lindbergh the year before when he passed away in that tragic car accident, his jersey needs to be hung up it hasn't officially been retired, the only one who's passed away in the flyers organization that's had his number hung up is number 4 Ashbee,

Giotrapani91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 03:07 PM
  #71
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
even in the heat of battle, there are shameful acts. i don't like to moralize about hockey because come on, it's just sports, but clarke on kharlamov, and that ugly three year run where every year it was a suter on gretzky, a graves on lemieux, a hunter on turgeon, a certain bald guy at the end of game six on trevor linden... cowardly, unsportsmanlike, and i feel like i personally would rather win by beating the guy than cheating.
Agree 100%.

I like that hockey has physicality but there is a line between being physical and intentionally attempting to injure (or just being reckless) that can't be crossed when being sportsmanlike.

Messier crossed it much more often than Hawerchuk, that's for sure.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2016, 03:16 PM
  #72
Giotrapani91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Messier totally deserved the Conn Smythe in 1984 -- why are we even having this discussion? And last time I checked, 26 points in 19 playoff games while neutralizing the defending champs' best center isn't "just injuring people".

We always to think about the context of the times, not just the isolated stats for one spring. The 1983 Oilers were much the same line-up (with a few tweaks) as the 1984 Oilers. Edmonton steamrolled every team on the way to the Finals in 1983 -- and I mean steamrolled -- with a furious offensive attack that was unprecedented in NHL history. Gretzky was rolling, with 34 points in 12 games, and everyone thought the Oilers would de-throne New York. Then they ran into Bill Smith in game one in Edmonton -- Gretzky played very well, but couldn't score -- and then lost confidence and the Islanders surged.

For scoring 4 assists in 4 Finals' games, Gretzky was considered a bum and the guy who couldn't get it done in the playoffs (never mind he'd set the all-time record for points in a playoff). I mean, what is 4 assists in the Finals going to get you? (Apparently it gets you the Conn Smythe in 2016...)

So, in 1984, it more of the same, except Edmonton was actually more challenged on the path to the Finals, this time by Calgary, to whom they nearly blew a 3-1 lead. Gretzky was good in game 7, but it was Messier who won it for them -- if you don't believe me, you could have asked Bob Johnson -- and, yes, he did take out three Flames in one game.

So, in the Finals, games 1, 2, and 3, and Gretzky still doesn't have a goal. And in game 3, Messier makes the play of the series that turns the tide. At the moment of his epic goal in game 3, the Islanders were outscoring Edmonton 8-3 in the 1984 Finals. After his goal, Edmonton outscored the Islanders 17-5. And Trottier and Bossy were ineffective. And Potvin was intimidated.


As to Gretzky in 1987... I'm okay with Hextall winning it. That's one of the years when there were about 6 players who were equally deserving. Gretzky was very good in the Finals, though, especially in games 1, 2, and 4. If the Oilers had clinched in game 5 at home (as they were expected to), he might have won it again, but they blew the 3-1 lead and the news-story became, 'Hextall Foils Oilers!', and it was a sexier headline than 'Gretzky wins again'.

Gretzky in '93 was deserving, but you have to give that one to Roy.
And panther idk why 4 assists gets you the MVP in 2016 and 2010 no disrespect to toews not a Crosby fan I think he whines and they compare him too much to Gretzky, and yet he doesn't have 1000 points Ovie is closer than him toews he'll get there, Gretzky was a great leader he showed it in the locker room, if I had to pick top ten captains of all time 10 would be cheli, 9 messier, 8 Stevens, 7 messier, 6 Mario Lemieux, 5 beliveau, 4 lidstrom & potvin, tie 3 Howe, 2 yzerman, 1 the great one, all of these captains led by example, or stand up. As for toews winning it I'd have to go with byfuglien or Kane that year. Crosby's either kessel, letang, or bonnino,

Giotrapani91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2016, 12:13 PM
  #73
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Messier totally deserved the Conn Smythe in 1984 -- why are we even having this discussion? And last time I checked, 26 points in 19 playoff games while neutralizing the defending champs' best center isn't "just injuring people".

We always have to think about the context of the times, not just the isolated stats for one spring. The 1983 Oilers were much the same line-up (with a few tweaks) as the 1984 Oilers. Edmonton steamrolled every team on the way to the Finals in 1983 -- and I mean steamrolled -- with a furious offensive attack that was unprecedented in NHL history. Gretzky was rolling, with 34 points in 12 games, and everyone thought the Oilers would de-throne New York. Then they ran into Bill Smith in game one in Edmonton -- Gretzky played very well, but couldn't score -- and then lost confidence and the Islanders surged.

For scoring 4 assists in 4 Finals' games, Gretzky was considered a bum and the guy who couldn't get it done in the playoffs (never mind he'd set the all-time record for points in a playoff). I mean, what is 4 assists in the Finals going to get you? (Apparently it gets you the Conn Smythe in 2016...)

So, in 1984, it more of the same, except Edmonton was actually more challenged on the path to the Finals, this time by Calgary, to whom they nearly blew a 3-1 lead. Gretzky was good in game 7, but it was Messier who won it for them -- if you don't believe me, you could have asked Bob Johnson -- and, yes, he did take out three Flames in one game.

So, in the Finals, games 1, 2, and 3, and Gretzky still doesn't have a goal. And in game 3, Messier makes the play of the series that turns the tide. At the moment of his epic goal in game 3, the Islanders were outscoring Edmonton 8-3 in the 1984 Finals. After his goal, Edmonton outscored the Islanders 17-5. And Trottier and Bossy were ineffective. And Potvin was intimidated.


As to Gretzky in 1987... I'm okay with Hextall winning it. That's one of the years when there were about 6 players who were equally deserving. Gretzky was very good in the Finals, though, especially in games 1, 2, and 4. If the Oilers had clinched in game 5 at home (as they were expected to), he might have won it again, but they blew the 3-1 lead and the news-story became, 'Hextall Foils Oilers!', and it was a sexier headline than 'Gretzky wins again'.

Gretzky in '93 was deserving, but you have to give that one to Roy.
If I can compare it to anything, I think Bergeron was winning the Conn Smythe in 2013 if Boston won, as opposed to Krejci who had 11 more points than him. This was shared by many people. Why? Because Bergeron scored some big goals, took some big faceoffs and played superb defensively. It isn't as if Krejci winning it would have been wrong, it wouldn't have, it just meant Bergeron winning it would have made sense too. Same thing with Gretzky and Messier in 1984. Gretzky could easily have won it, but Messier did some impactful things that spring. Gretzky had that big game in Game 5 against the Isles, scoring two goals right away and then assisting on the other. The game was over before it started, thanks to Gretzky. But I guess it wasn't enough to the voters.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2016, 12:21 PM
  #74
bobholly39
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Messier totally deserved the Conn Smythe in 1984 -- why are we even having this discussion? And last time I checked, 26 points in 19 playoff games while neutralizing the defending champs' best center isn't "just injuring people".

We always have to think about the context of the times, not just the isolated stats for one spring. The 1983 Oilers were much the same line-up (with a few tweaks) as the 1984 Oilers. Edmonton steamrolled every team on the way to the Finals in 1983 -- and I mean steamrolled -- with a furious offensive attack that was unprecedented in NHL history. Gretzky was rolling, with 34 points in 12 games, and everyone thought the Oilers would de-throne New York. Then they ran into Bill Smith in game one in Edmonton -- Gretzky played very well, but couldn't score -- and then lost confidence and the Islanders surged.

For scoring 4 assists in 4 Finals' games, Gretzky was considered a bum and the guy who couldn't get it done in the playoffs (never mind he'd set the all-time record for points in a playoff). I mean, what is 4 assists in the Finals going to get you? (Apparently it gets you the Conn Smythe in 2016...)

So, in 1984, it more of the same, except Edmonton was actually more challenged on the path to the Finals, this time by Calgary, to whom they nearly blew a 3-1 lead. Gretzky was good in game 7, but it was Messier who won it for them -- if you don't believe me, you could have asked Bob Johnson -- and, yes, he did take out three Flames in one game.

So, in the Finals, games 1, 2, and 3, and Gretzky still doesn't have a goal. And in game 3, Messier makes the play of the series that turns the tide. At the moment of his epic goal in game 3, the Islanders were outscoring Edmonton 8-3 in the 1984 Finals. After his goal, Edmonton outscored the Islanders 17-5. And Trottier and Bossy were ineffective. And Potvin was intimidated.


As to Gretzky in 1987... I'm okay with Hextall winning it. That's one of the years when there were about 6 players who were equally deserving. Gretzky was very good in the Finals, though, especially in games 1, 2, and 4. If the Oilers had clinched in game 5 at home (as they were expected to), he might have won it again, but they blew the 3-1 lead and the news-story became, 'Hextall Foils Oilers!', and it was a sexier headline than 'Gretzky wins again'.

Gretzky in '93 was deserving, but you have to give that one to Roy.
My reason for thinking Gretzky > Messier is simple. Remove Gretzky and Edmonton doesn't win. Remove Messier and maybe they do.

I feel that way about Roy in 96. Remove Roy and they 100% don't win. Remove Sakic and maybe they still win.

Gretzky's name hurt him here. If he wasn't Gretzky and hadn't gotten people used to him scoring 200+points - than his offensive numbers are enough to win the Smythe. It sounds like he should have won the Smythe in 83 too.

I didn't see the games first hand so I'll fully admit I'm mostly looking at stats - but I feel as though when stats are so high you have to win.

bobholly39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2016, 02:43 PM
  #75
ytsur
Registered User
 
ytsur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobholly39 View Post
My reason for thinking Gretzky > Messier is simple. Remove Gretzky and Edmonton doesn't win. Remove Messier and maybe they do.

I feel that way about Roy in 96. Remove Roy and they 100% don't win. Remove Sakic and maybe they still win.

Gretzky's name hurt him here. If he wasn't Gretzky and hadn't gotten people used to him scoring 200+points - than his offensive numbers are enough to win the Smythe. It sounds like he should have won the Smythe in 83 too.

I didn't see the games first hand so I'll fully admit I'm mostly looking at stats - but I feel as though when stats are so high you have to win.
I have highly critical of you, but you are 100% spot on here.

And might I remind some of you that the Conn Smythe is awarded to the playoff MVP, as in, all rounds collectively, which makes Messier's '84 win over Gretzky all the dumber. Regardless, I have no respect for media-decided awards. The media are fans themselves with their own petty agendas.

The Stanley Cup and Art Ross Trophy are the only pieces of hardware that matter. They're irrefutable.

ytsur 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 11:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.