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 is Gretzky known as the best?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2004, 02:27 AM
  #51
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYIsles1
Being the best more often than not is more about time peirods in league history.

Maybe Rocket Richard scores a hundred goals in Edmonton on that ice surface in the early eighties. Maybe Mike Bossy does if he is not on an Eastern Conference team and has to play some defense. Switch Paul Coffey and Bobby Orr and what numbers does Orr put up on that ice surface in that era.
Gretzky would not have scored what he did playing in today's league and would not have put up the numbers he did in previous era's.

He played his most productive hockey in an expansion conference against some very weak teams. If he played in the Eastern Conference in that era he would not have put up the same numbers and would have taken more of a physical wear in the playoffs to get to the finals.

Personally I felt Lemieux and Bossy's numbers in a better conference was far more tangible than anything Gretzky did.


I.am.ca is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 03:02 AM
  #52
McThome
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,026
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to McThome
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt
I'd change Ruth to Bonds, Woods to Palmer, and Marino to Brown.
yes, but that just demonstrates how little you know about baseball my friend. Ruth hit 50 when the next best hit 20. Ruth pitched and won 20 games twice (once with an ERA under 2.00).

Ruth still has over ten homers more then Bonds in over 200 atbats less.
Ruth is top ten all time in batting average, Bonds isn't even in the top 120.
Ruth has nearly 400 more RBI then Bonds, again, in over 200 atbats less.
Ruth's OBP is still about 25 points higher then Bonds'.
The Babes slug is about 80 points higher then Bonds' (that's the one I'm not sure off hand).

Bonds isn't even as good all time as Ty Cobb, he's hit more home runs, otherwise he's completely inferior. All of a sudden Bonds is third, and we haven't even looked at pitchers yet. I would take both Cy Young and Walter Johnson all time over Bonds every day of the week and twice on sundays, too. When all is said and done, Bonds MIGHT be a top five player all time. But in 50 years, The Babe will still echo in baseball louder then Bonds' greatest scream in the last 15 years.

.... oh... and Gretzky is the only equivalent to the Babe in pure dominance in any of the four major NA sports.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
McThome is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 05:18 AM
  #53
clefty
Ice cream for crow
 
clefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Fujairah
Posts: 17,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw

Mario Lemieux couldn't even get a point per game a couple of years ago in the playoffs... his production nosedived.
Mario had 17 points in 18 games during those playoffs, which is .95 ppg. You're splitting hairs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw
Wayne? At the same age, with no Jaromir Jagr, EASILY eclipsed that, didn't even break a sweat.
Why is it that so many people attribute many of Jagr's successful numbers to playing with Mario, and so many other people attribute a lot of Mario's successful numbers to playing with Jagr? Anyone else ever notice that? Never mind the fact that Jagr stuggled terribly that postseason with a shoulder injury and only had two goals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw
Also, Wayne and Mario's regular season PPGs are comparable... but their playoff PPGs are not. Wayne's lead is quite signifigant
Gretzky has 1.8 ppg in the playoffs, Lemieux 1.6. Yeah thats a huge margin. His ppg average is better, but thats what happens when you play with strong teams that enable you to consistently venture deep into the playoffs. Gretzky played twice as many playoff games than Lemieux.




Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw
Let's see Peter Forsberg or Jaromir Jagr get 90 points in a 5.2 goals per game season, at 37.p
Mario did.


Last edited by clefty: 10-26-2004 at 05:21 AM.
clefty is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 07:35 AM
  #54
hunter1909*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYIsles1
Being the best more often than not is more about time peirods in league history.

Maybe Rocket Richard scores a hundred goals in Edmonton on that ice surface in the early eighties. Maybe Mike Bossy does if he is not on an Eastern Conference team and has to play some defense. Switch Paul Coffey and Bobby Orr and what numbers does Orr put up on that ice surface in that era.
Gretzky would not have scored what he did playing in today's league and would not have put up the numbers he did in previous era's.

He played his most productive hockey in an expansion conference against some very weak teams. If he played in the Eastern Conference in that era he would not have put up the same numbers and would have taken more of a physical wear in the playoffs to get to the finals.

Personally I felt Lemieux and Bossy's numbers in a better conference was far more tangible than anything Gretzky did.

TYPICAL SOUR GRAPES...FROM ANOTHER LOSER ISLANDERS FAN...

THE BEST THING THE OILERS EVER DID: ***** SLAPPING THE ISLES 'DRIVE FOR FIVE" LMAO...

THE 2ND BEST THING OILERS EVER DID: WINNING FIVE CUPS = MORE THAN ISLANDERS EVER DID(AND PROBABLY EVER WILL)...

1983...1983....1983...LOL

hunter1909* is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 08:38 PM
  #55
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clefty
Mario had 17 points in 18 games during those playoffs, which is .95 ppg. You're splitting hairs.



Why is it that so many people attribute many of Jagr's successful numbers to playing with Mario, and so many other people attribute a lot of Mario's successful numbers to playing with Jagr? Anyone else ever notice that? Never mind the fact that Jagr stuggled terribly that postseason with a shoulder injury and only had two goals.



Gretzky has 1.8 ppg in the playoffs, Lemieux 1.6. Yeah thats a huge margin. His ppg average is better, but thats what happens when you play with strong teams that enable you to consistently venture deep into the playoffs. Gretzky played twice as many playoff games than Lemieux.






Mario did.

Thats right Clefty you tell them.


Mario fought cancer, came back and won the scoring title after finishing his last treatment. You talk about Greatness? Mario sneezes greatness out of his nose, the man is unreal.

I.am.ca is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 08:40 PM
  #56
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter1909
TYPICAL SOUR GRAPES...FROM ANOTHER LOSER ISLANDERS FAN...

THE BEST THING THE OILERS EVER DID: ***** SLAPPING THE ISLES 'DRIVE FOR FIVE" LMAO...

THE 2ND BEST THING OILERS EVER DID: WINNING FIVE CUPS = MORE THAN ISLANDERS EVER DID(AND PROBABLY EVER WILL)...

1983...1983....1983...LOL

Whats the argument?

You do know that between the 2 teams, One of them won the stanley cup FOUR years in a row.

5 Stanley Cups, 4 Stanley cups...1 less than the Oilers, hardly anything to brag about really. Gretz wasn't even on the 5th cup winning team.

I.am.ca is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 10:01 PM
  #57
espo*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kruezer
I have to agree, no disrespect to what Bonds has done, but Ruth is the best, Bonds is a great player, but really, I don't think he's even in the group just below Ruth, quite yet.
To me,i don't think either of them were as good as Willie Mays.He's the greatest of all time imo.

espo* is offline  
Old
10-26-2004, 11:47 PM
  #58
jiggs 10
Registered User
 
jiggs 10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hockeytown, ND
Country: United States
Posts: 3,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt
I'd change Ruth to Bonds, Woods to Palmer, and Marino to Brown.
Agree, except for "steroids" Bonds over Ruth. No way, never! Barry Bonds is not even the best player in his generation, let alone one of the top 100 of all-time. Griffey Jr. was better for 12 years, Sammy Sosa was better for 7 years of their careers, and none of them come close to equaling Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Pete Rose, Hank Greenberg, Sadahara Oh, or Crash Davis! Bonds did very little of value until 1994, when he started on the 'roids (as ANYONE with eyes can see) after being traded from Pittsburgh. He was a skinny, wimpy 180 lb. guy who in 1 year turned into a 230 lb. slugging horrible outfielder. And he kept getting bigger and worse! I know lots of slo-pitch outfielders who are better than Bonds! And I'm one of them! I can out-throw, out-catch, and out-hustle that puffed up cheater, but because umpires are scared to call a strike on him (because, obviously, MLB has ordered them NOT to) he gets lots of perfect pitches to swing at for his cheesy home runs. He's a wuss, and arrogant to boot! Cripes, Kirby Puckett was TWICE the fielder Bonds is, and 90% the hitter. Why isn't he seen as an all-time great? Sheesh.....

jiggs 10 is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 12:34 AM
  #59
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Mario had 17 points in 18 games during those playoffs, which is .95 ppg. You're splitting hairs.
I'm not splitting hairs, you're just reacting to the wrong point. His production went from something like 1.65 to less than 1.

Not a very inspiring drop, and certainly not splitting hairs. His difference in his numbers and his play were VERY signifigant, compared to what Wayne did at the same age on a worse team. If by splitting hairs you meant the point-per-game thing, that's just an afterthought, who cares. The meat of my argument was that he's nowhere near the offensive force he is in the regular season, whereas an old Gretzky's PPG and overall dominance didn't falter when the defenses closed up and the game's got tougher.

Quote:
Why is it that so many people attribute many of Jagr's successful numbers to playing with Mario, and so many other people attribute a lot of Mario's successful numbers to playing with Jagr? Anyone else ever notice that? Never mind the fact that Jagr stuggled terribly that postseason with a shoulder injury and only had two goals.
What do you mean? I'm not attributing any individual's production to any other INDIVIDUAL.

But when the wingers on your powerplay were often Niklas Sundstrom, a still sub-par Alexei Kovalev, and Adam Graves, that's a MAJOR handicap compared to having Robert Lang, Alexei Kovalev, Martin Straka, and Jaromir Jagr at your disposal.

Hockey's a team game. So I guess it's fair game to attribute Wayne's better career numbers to his Oilers teammates and poor Penguins teams, but not fair when you use this point AGAINST Mario and FOR Wayne.


Quote:
Gretzky has 1.8 ppg in the playoffs, Lemieux 1.6. Yeah thats a huge margin. His ppg average is better, but thats what happens when you play with strong teams that enable you to consistently venture deep into the playoffs. Gretzky played twice as many playoff games than Lemieux.
The difference between a 150 point player and a 130 is quite tangible. What looks more impressive to you? How many players have scored 150 points? And how many have scored 130?

And the fact that Wayne played so many playoff games only makes it MORE impressive. Like I said, Wayne played on weaker playoff teams than Mario, who has rarely been in the playoffs (other than '89) without the aid of such players as Kevin Stevens, Ron Francis, Mark Recchi, Jaromir Jagr, Alexei Kovalev, Joe Mullen, Rick Tocchet, Robert Lang, Martin Straka, et al.

An overwhelming amount of his playoff games have been on ELITE offensive squads. His playoff PPG is not affected negatively by those poor mid 80s Penguins teams, because they didn't make the playoffs anyway. He's only ever been on GREAT offensive playoff teams, post 1989 (only 11 games that year).

And he's NEVER went far with a team that wasn't offensively dominant, whereas Wayne carried at least 2 of them on his back through 3 or more rounds. Look at Wayne's wingers in '97, or the playoff stats of the LA Kings in '93. The offense WAS Wayne Gretzky. He had 40, and the only other guys with 20 were... his LINEMATES.

Then look at the stats for Mario's cup winning teams. Lots of guys put up more than 20 points, and Kevin Stevens even put up 33 once, with Recchi putting up 34! Man, imagine if Wayne had THOSE linemates at that time! He might have got 50 points.

Wayne did more, with less, more often. At least in the playoffs.

Mario never played on a playoff team as average offensively as the '93 Kings, or with Wingers as average as some of Wayne's in '97.

Therefore, my point is, Wayne had more time to actually LOWER his PPG in the playoffs... and yet, look at how far ahead of Mario he is, despite that.


Quote:
Let's see Peter Forsberg or Jaromir Jagr get 90 points in a 5.2 goals per game season, at 37.p


Mario did.
Way to take my quote WAY out of context, Captain Obvious. I wan't even talking about Mario at that point.

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 01:12 AM
  #60
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jiggs 10
Agree, except for "steroids" Bonds over Ruth. No way, never! Barry Bonds is not even the best player in his generation, let alone one of the top 100 of all-time. Bonds did very little of value until 1994, when he started on the 'roids (as ANYONE with eyes can see) after being traded from Pittsburgh.
Sorry, but that's just idiotic. You're obviously totally biased against the man.

Bonds won THREE LEAGUE MVP awards *before* 1994. And he should have been 4 for 4, had not some sentimental votes gone Terry Pendleton's way. Not to mention the four Gold Gloves, and leading the league in On Base Percentage, Slugging, OPS, Walks, RBI's, and Home Runs numerous times during those years.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 02:07 AM
  #61
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
Sorry, but that's just idiotic. You're obviously totally biased against the man.

Bonds won THREE LEAGUE MVP awards *before* 1994. And he should have been 4 for 4, had not some sentimental votes gone Terry Pendleton's way. Not to mention the four Gold Gloves, and leading the league in On Base Percentage, Slugging, OPS, Walks, RBI's, and Home Runs numerous times during those years.
Yep, he even managed to help make Bobby Bonilla a household name. That is one hell of an accomplishment.

Still, Babe is still clearly better then Bonds (I know you're not contesting that).

Blane Youngblood is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 04:27 AM
  #62
Diaboli
Registered User
 
Diaboli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: City once voted as F
Posts: 1,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pei fan
Sorry, i was going to add more to the post but I had to leave just then.
Best measures ones ability but greatness measures the impact they made using
that ability.Pele did alot for soccer to expand it's audience and participants.He also
had a social impact.Also:good ,better,best vs great,greater,greatest.Or the
difference between good and great.
Now that's not very fair, is it. Mr. Nascimento plyed in the 1960s and 1970s his best game. Maradona did the same in the late 1980s and early 1990s. You'd think there aren't as many people interested in the game in the 1960s as there are in the 1990s. Maradona also had a social impact. Not a good one, but that's beside the point. Where did Pele play? Almost all of his career in Brazil, and a few years in the states. Maradona played in Italy in his prime. I'd say, that Maradona was very very known among people when played, contrary to Pele, when he played. Of course many people had HEARD about Pele, but Maradona was SEEN by many people.

So yes. I agree, that Pele made the game more known, but that's not fair to Maradona, since he played later. Pele made a lot of goals (many of which are controversy). But Maradona dominated every aspect of the game in the offensive zone. He could do it all. It's not surprising, that probably the two best known goals in football history are both Maradona's. And they were both scored in the same game, if I recall.

Diaboli is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 09:29 AM
  #63
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,898
vCash: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter1909
TYPICAL SOUR GRAPES...FROM ANOTHER LOSER ISLANDERS FAN...

THE BEST THING THE OILERS EVER DID: ***** SLAPPING THE ISLES 'DRIVE FOR FIVE" LMAO...

THE 2ND BEST THING OILERS EVER DID: WINNING FIVE CUPS = MORE THAN ISLANDERS EVER DID(AND PROBABLY EVER WILL)...

1983...1983....1983...LOL
Dear Islanders Fans,

Please don't take this a representation of typical Oilers fans. We appreciate that Isles were pretty fantastic team in their own right.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 11:33 AM
  #64
KariyaIsGod*
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clefty

Why is it that so many people attribute many of Jagr's successful numbers to playing with Mario, and so many other people attribute a lot of Mario's successful numbers to playing with Jagr? Anyone else ever notice that? Never mind the fact that Jagr stuggled terribly that postseason with a shoulder injury and only had two goals.
Same reason people always attribute Wayne's great number to playing with great players. He never played with Anderson, Messier or Tikkanen.



Quote:
Gretzky has 1.8 ppg in the playoffs, Lemieux 1.6. Yeah thats a huge margin. His ppg average is better, but thats what happens when you play with strong teams that enable you to consistently venture deep into the playoffs. Gretzky played twice as many playoff games than Lemieux.
You realize that the more games you play, the harder it is to maintain a high PPG average...

KariyaIsGod* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 12:14 PM
  #65
04' hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: City of Brotherly Lo
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
ehhhhh.....

Gretz great, you bet - better than ORR, NO!

Replace Gretzky with Orr on the Oilers and how many cups DO THEY WIN??? Orr with that team speed, holy *****!

Gretz. and Co. essentially came into the league as the All Star team from the old WHA. Ziegler realizing Gretzky's appeal decided to "protect" his main drawing card and the great one had certain liberties during his career - something Orr NEVER had. Orr was "run at" his whole career. Run at Gretz., abd you were in the box, tell me I'm wrong.

If we could have 5 Gretzky's play 5 on 5 against 5 Orr's, who would win??, answer honestly please.

Orr was the best 5 tool hockey player EVER. And its not even close.

04' hockey is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 12:46 PM
  #66
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Gretz. and Co. essentially came into the league as the All Star team from the old WHA.
Yeah, Wayne can attribute his 137 rookie points to the wizardry of Brett Calighen and Blair McDonald.

Quote:
If we could have 5 Gretzky's play 5 on 5 against 5 Orr's, who would win??, answer honestly please.
Orr, but that's totally ridiculous and not even worth thinking about for more than 2 seconds. Try to be reasonable. That scenario would never and could never happen. Hockey is as much about the foot soldiers, unsung heroes and complimentary players as it is the Waynes and Marios and Orrs. Wayne used his teammates better than anyone, ever. He made mice into men.

Wayne could have easily led Boston to the same heights Orr did. Boston easily wins their measley two Cups, and probably three with Gretzky setting up Esposito, you heard it here. It's no more farfetched than what you're claiming. Espo would get 90 goals, and the Big Bad Bruins would insure Wayne's safety. Why bother defending his manhood, he was a wimp... there's nothing shameful or illegal about requiring some backup, not when you're unstoppable offensively and shaming the league on the scoresheet.

Also, I believe the NHL has caught up to Orr's physical gifts more than they have to Wayne's mental gifts. Orr would NEVER be able to rush up the ice with such aplomb these days, and those point shots would go in with MUCH less frequency. He'd still be the best D-man in the game, but forget about him being as far ahead of the pack as he was in the '70s.

Wayne could easily stick and kill today's defenses, he did it in a season every bit as low scoring as we see nowadays, and at 37 with NO offensive support, to boot.


Last edited by revolverjgw: 10-27-2004 at 12:51 PM.
revolverjgw is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 12:47 PM
  #67
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04' hockey
Gretz great, you bet - better than ORR, NO!

Replace Gretzky with Orr on the Oilers and how many cups DO THEY WIN??? Orr with that team speed, holy *****!
Certainly no more than the 4 they won.

Quote:
Gretz. and Co. essentially came into the league as the All Star team from the old WHA.
You have no idea what you are talking about. The Oilers came in as an All Star team from the old WHA?

The WHA Oilers (as well as the other 3 WHA teams) had to go through two drafts, which allowed the NHL players to claim players from them, befoe they got to the NHL. The only decent player on that team, outside of Gretzky, was Blair McDonald (who was basically a product of Gretzky).

An allstar team?

:lol

Quote:
Ziegler realizing Gretzky's appeal decided to "protect" his main drawing card and the great one had certain liberties during his career - something Orr NEVER had. Orr was "run at" his whole career. Run at Gretz., abd you were in the box, tell me I'm wrong.
Yes, you are wrong. For the start of his career, when he was still a kid, he had the toughest player in the NHL riding shotgun with him... no one was going to mess with Semenko. Later on, as much as players tried, they simply couldn't hit Gretzky... he very rarely ever put himself in a position where he was vulnerable.

Quote:
If we could have 5 Gretzky's play 5 on 5 against 5 Orr's, who would win??, answer honestly please.

Orr was the best 5 tool hockey player EVER. And its not even close.
Seeing as we are tossing out hypothetical crap (5 Gretzky's vs 5 Orr's... lol... what the hell is that all about?), here's a question for you...

Would you take Gretzky's 20 NHL seasons, or Bobby's 10?

Please don't lie and say Orr's... Orr had 6 Good years... Gretzky had 19.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.

Last edited by dawgbone: 10-27-2004 at 01:11 PM.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 12:55 PM
  #68
pei fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diaboli
Now that's not very fair, is it. Mr. Nascimento plyed in the 1960s and 1970s his best game. Maradona did the same in the late 1980s and early 1990s. You'd think there aren't as many people interested in the game in the 1960s as there are in the 1990s. Maradona also had a social impact. Not a good one, but that's beside the point. Where did Pele play? Almost all of his career in Brazil, and a few years in the states. Maradona played in Italy in his prime. I'd say, that Maradona was very very known among people when played, contrary to Pele, when he played. Of course many people had HEARD about Pele, but Maradona was SEEN by many people.

So yes. I agree, that Pele made the game more known, but that's not fair to Maradona, since he played later. Pele made a lot of goals (many of which are controversy). But Maradona dominated every aspect of the game in the offensive zone. He could do it all. It's not surprising, that probably the two best known goals in football history are both Maradona's. And they were both scored in the same game, if I recall.
you are really missing my point.

pei fan is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 02:09 PM
  #69
04' hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: City of Brotherly Lo
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=revolverjgw]Yeah, Wayne can attribute his 137 rookie points to the wizardry of Brett Calighen and Blair McDonald.





.

Also, I believe the NHL has caught up to Orr's physical gifts more than they have to Wayne's mental gifts. Orr would NEVER be able to rush up the ice with such aplomb these days, and those point shots would go in with MUCH less frequency. He'd still be the best D-man in the game, but forget about him being as far ahead of the pack as he was in the '70s.




YOU obviously never saw him play.....SHAME, you wouldn't be posting such drivel if you had.

04' hockey is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 02:16 PM
  #70
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04' hockey
you wouldn't be posting such drivel if you had.
Pot, meet Kettle...

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 02:26 PM
  #71
Diaboli
Registered User
 
Diaboli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: City once voted as F
Posts: 1,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pei fan
you are really missing my point.
Can't argue with that.

Diaboli is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 07:16 PM
  #72
KariyaIsGod*
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,139
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=04' hockey]
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw
Yeah, Wayne can attribute his 137 rookie points to the wizardry of Brett Calighen and Blair McDonald.


Also, I believe the NHL has caught up to Orr's physical gifts more than they have to Wayne's mental gifts. Orr would NEVER be able to rush up the ice with such aplomb these days, and those point shots would go in with MUCH less frequency. He'd still be the best D-man in the game, but forget about him being as far ahead of the pack as he was in the '70s.




YOU obviously never saw him play.....SHAME, you wouldn't be posting such drivel if you had.
Actually, he's right. Don't sit there and tell me Bobby would be the same now because no longer would he be the fastest.

On the other hand, Wayne is still the smartest...

KariyaIsGod* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 07:59 PM
  #73
04' hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: City of Brotherly Lo
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Well.....

How many of your current day "faster than the back in the day" offensive Dmen have come close to a scoring title?????

HOW MANY?????????????????

Thats how great Orr was, watch the videos, he's all by himself leaving HIS teammates AND the defending team in his wake when he took off, AFTER defending first in the defensive zone.. And that was on surgery ravaged knees.

HE'D BE BETTER TODAY BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE PLAYERS WHO COULD KEEP UP WITH HIM!

Orr had the heart of a lion, NEVER complained about the rough stuff, unlike Gretz, Orr took care of payback himself.....detested losing and played hurt ALL THE TIME. I guess Gordie Howe's opinion about the best ever doesn't matter too, huh?

You guys fawning over 99 are treating Canada's probably greatest treasure like an afterthought.

Do some research.

04' hockey is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 09:51 PM
  #74
Anksun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,587
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Anksun
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malefic74
This is how the "East Coast bias" thing gets started. Incidentally the Pens did pretty good with that style in the early 90's. Ditto the Nords and Habs in the late 80's. Boston had no problem running and gunning in the 70's did they?

Versus the soft Western conference teams whom he had more chance to do damage against playing them more often in 762 regular season games Gretz scored 1583 pts. An average of 2.08 PPG.

Against the big bad Eastern conference in regular season games he managed a paltry 1116 pts in 611 games. An average of 1.82 PPG.

The difference is a mere .26 PPG. As an aside the team that fared best against him? The Buffalo Sabres. The worst? The Quebec Nordiques/Colorado Avalanche.

I'm a fan of the Montreal Canadiens, and Eastern Conference team and a power for the bulk of the 80's. But my boys could not stop Gretzky. Bob Gainey could not stop Gretzky, neither could Guy Carbonneau; both of whom are regarded as some of the best defensive forwards the game has ever seen.

I agree with you, the styles of hockey in the two conferences do favor certain types of player, Val Bure or Vince Damphousse are good examples of that. But for Gretzky it made a negligible difference, if any at all.
I dont want to go too much in detail as I think I pretty agree with your whole statement except the stats you are bringing could very well better be used by those who said he did that good because he play on the western conference...

0.26 PPG less is actually 12,5% less which is HUGE. And the number of games played in both conference just make this more relevant... (Of course, you might want to note that he play the last few years on the Rangers which has probably contribute to put down his East PPG more than West PPG)
__________________________________________________ ________

On another note, I think it's hard to compared guys like The Rocket and The Great one. There's so many years between them! All in all, guys who has been good enough to get such a nickname as those 2 guys and Lemieux with "Le Magnifique" are in a league appart of all the others.

Anksun is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 10:35 PM
  #75
kruezer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Also, I believe the NHL has caught up to Orr's physical gifts more than they have to Wayne's mental gifts. Orr would NEVER be able to rush up the ice with such aplomb these days, and those point shots would go in with MUCH less frequency. He'd still be the best D-man in the game, but forget about him being as far ahead of the pack as he was in the '70s.

Wayne could easily stick and kill today's defenses, he did it in a season every bit as low scoring as we see nowadays, and at 37 with NO offensive support, to boot.
I have to disagree, I still pick Wayne over Orr on the all time rankings, but I really do not think that Orr would be closer to the pack at all, physical gifts nothing, he still has a ridiculous hockey mind, it seems to me the arguement your using is very similar to that which the Lemieux fans are using to discredit Gretzky. Great players are great players, the era they played in has nothing to do with it, not to mention the amount Orr changed the game, he's really the only guy comparable to Gretzky in that regard IMO. I'll respectfully disagree.

kruezer is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:36 AM.

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.