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.

Would Lafleur have been considered the greatest more if..

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2004, 02:36 PM
  #26
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
OK TELL ME HOW SMOKING COULD AFFECT SOMEONE THEN. IF LAFLEUR WAS STILL ABLE TO PUT UP 70 POINTS AFTER HIS ACCIDENT AND YOU CLAIMED THAT ITS SMOKING THAT MADE HIM SLOW DOWN THEN IF SMOKING COULD BE REALLY EFFECTING I DONT THINK HE WOULD BE ABLEO TO GET 70 POINTS. EXPLAIN THAT!
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/education...s/yuthfax1.htm

you're probably 11, so you haven't covered this in health class yet, but to highlight what's important here:

"Nicotine narrows your blood vessels and puts added strain on your heart.
Smoking can wreck lungs and reduce oxygen available for muscles used during sports.
Smokers suffer shortness of breath (gasp!) almost 3 times more often than nonsmokers.
Smokers run slower and canít run as far, affecting overall athletic performance."


Last edited by Stephen: 10-23-2004 at 02:39 PM.
Stephen is offline  
Old
10-23-2004, 07:27 PM
  #27
KOVALEV10*
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Simply the best!
Posts: 3,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/education...s/yuthfax1.htm

you're probably 11, so you haven't covered this in health class yet, but to highlight what's important here:

"Nicotine narrows your blood vessels and puts added strain on your heart.
Smoking can wreck lungs and reduce oxygen available for muscles used during sports.
Smokers suffer shortness of breath (gasp!) almost 3 times more often than nonsmokers.
Smokers run slower and canít run as far, affecting overall athletic performance."
Yes BUT IT DOESNT AFFECT EVERYONE! You guys are telling me his numbers dropped because of his smoking the same year he was in the accident. What a coincidence!

KOVALEV10* is offline  
Old
10-23-2004, 09:16 PM
  #28
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
Yes BUT IT DOESNT AFFECT EVERYONE! You guys are telling me his numbers dropped because of his smoking the same year he was in the accident. What a coincidence!
It's like I'm talking to a lead pipe here.

This is what I said originally:

"And who knows what he would have done after 1980 had he not been hurt. He was a big smoker, so his game might have gone down the toilet prematurely anyway, like Dale Hawerchuk."

This means that EVEN IF HE HADN'T BEEN HURT, that your FANBOY FANTASY NUMBERS PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN PRODUCED. BECAUSE GUY LAFLEUR DIDN'T TAKE CARE OF HIMSELF AS WELL AS HE SHOULD HAVE

Stephen is offline  
Old
10-23-2004, 09:43 PM
  #29
Toonces
The beer kitty
 
Toonces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
Yes BUT IT DOESNT AFFECT EVERYONE! You guys are telling me his numbers dropped because of his smoking the same year he was in the accident. What a coincidence!
Well, it doesn't always manifest in lung cancer or emphysema, but it does everything Stephen listed to everyone who smokes regularly.

Toonces is offline  
Old
10-23-2004, 10:19 PM
  #30
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,900
vCash: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
Yes BUT IT DOESNT AFFECT EVERYONE! You guys are telling me his numbers dropped because of his smoking the same year he was in the accident. What a coincidence!
Sorry, you're right. The smoking and drinking never hurt the flower. If he hadn't gotten pasted and cut off half his ear in that car crash, he'd still be playing, probably scoring 200-210 points a year. Now go ask your dad if you can have a smoke. Don't forget to inhale. Hey, maybe he'll let you have a haul of his lysol/gin beverage, too. Oh, and that man on the moon thing, that's another big fib, too.>>

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
10-24-2004, 01:57 AM
  #31
Hab-a-maniac
Registered User
 
Hab-a-maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto via Calgary!
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,975
vCash: 500
Listen, buddy. Guy's car accident caused minor injuries physically, but weighed on him mentally. He was never the same after it but it wasn't just the accident that derailed his career, it was Lemaire instituting a defense-first system, his diminished role on the team and the physical neglect catching up to him. Guy never took care of himself. Smoking can affect you playing hockey, everyone should know that. Just because he put up 100 pt. seasons doesn't mean jac because later, his skill and ability weren't enough to get him by because his health wasn't up to par. Although Guy made a comeback, he'd toned down the smoking and partying. Heck, it worked for one year on the lowly Nordiques as he was average almost a point per game (low 30s in points in 39 games not bad for an out-of-shape 38 year old at that point). But he was hurt because of his prior physical neglect and one time because not wearing a helmet caused some guy to break his jaw by planting him face first into the glass.

I think guys like Gainey and Robinson gave up smoking or how else would they have been so damn durable. Guy was never in good shape, preferring to smoke, eat poutine and hot dogs, drink gallons of coffee and alcohol and generally have a good time. But it restricted the greatness he could've reached. Make him in tip top shape and he certainly could have been like Lemieux. But to say IF not for his car accident, IF not for his slow start to his career, Guy would've had, in my estimation, 1900 pts. How do you even come up with the random numbers to add to his totals? Anyway, Mario never worked out and had a lousy diet, etc. And it caused his injuries to pile up. Only in the 90s did he turn it around and manage to keep going, because of his cancer and generally lousy back.

Now, he still is constantly injured but it's better than before and not because a lack of physical health. Father time hasn't helped. But he would be retired permanently due to the pain if not for his turnaround in shape that, if it came while he was in junior, might just have made him unstoppable and statistically the best. Heck, Gretz was luckier than Mario because although Mario had the better body for hockey, Gretz had the better smarts. He just knew how to keep healthy but he was never a workout freak and his back problems, starting with the Suter hit, only worsened due to this fact. He managed to hold on until 1999 but that's when the back troubles finally crippled his game, scoring 9 goals in 70 games. While Lemieux's injuries wre serious enough to keep him out of the lineup a lot, Gretzky was able to play through the pain more often and it slowly chipped away at his point toals every year. Give him a good Ranger supporting cast and great phyiscal shape and he's up there with Jagr in scoring races by 1999.

If not for the average shape he was in, he could've been like Messier or Howe, lasting and producing well into his late 30s. But in a more Gretzky like way because he has about as much natural (and developed) talent as those two combined. Likewise, even one of those guys probably kept in better shape double what Gretzky ever was in his career. Gretz couldn't keep up by the early 90s but his smarts and skills adapted to keep him effective. He never tried to play defense anyway, but not being able to keep up made the reason be because he couldn't, rather than he didn't want to like before. So scoring titles at age 38 for Wayne? Could've happened for sure.

So y'see it happened to the best of them. Granted, in Guy's prime (1978) he was with a reduced competition and 50% of the guys in the NHL were big smokers, big drinkers or both. That stat probably decreased every 13 years or so by 25% until now where it's maybe 1% smokers (Cigars every so often doesn't count obviously), and 5% big drinkers (lots of guys drink and party but about 5% probably are heavy drinkers/drunks). So to not be aware that drinking a lot and smoking reduces your ability to be a long-time, effective NHL star, is asinine. Injuries and personal problems can derail careers but with today's conditioning, there's no reason that if he wanted to, an NHL'er could play 20 years with a little luck and keeping in great shape. Guy had the former, but didn't do the latter in his 16 season career (you see, his enormous abilities made it that way but for his era, he could've made it all without a brief retirement period-he did so when he was just 33 and came back when he was 37).

Bryan Trottier did decline at his end due to the fact his abilities weren't so overpowering that he could live off of them forever, but he kept in good enough shape to last for 19 seasons, a very long time for guys who started their career in the 70s and were at their career's tail ends, at the lastest, when the 90s advent of condition. Trots had longevity when the average "lengthy career" took a guy till he was at least 30 considered a player's prime these days but a player's twilght time back then. I remember seeing a classic 1986 playoff game between St. Louis and Calgary with an ESPN feature about the Flames' "greybeards nearing their career's end" in McDonald at 34 and Risebrough at 32!! The average career could take a guy up to as old as 33 and no more, usually. With the expanded league and a raid for fresh, young talent that caused many a player to be out of work due to the younger, cheaper alternative (no one wanted a guy like 33 year old Steve Shutt after 84-85 with the Kings when they could have some junior star like Craig Simpson or Brian Bellows light the lamp instead).

This was the norm for the NHL from 1979 through to 1994. Trots was the exception, and there were other odd cases (guys had regular jobs in the NHL when they were 19-21 in these days) like Joe Mullen (78-97), Mike Gartner (78-98, one year as an 18 year old in the WHA), Robinson (72-92), Gainey (73-89), Mark Howe (73-95, a remarkable Howe trait of longevity was carried on by him through 6 years of WHA, and 16 years of NHL), Lanny McDonald (73-89) and Denis Potvin (73-88), who all could've played 22 years like Stevens, under today's training improvements. A lot has changed from Lafleur's time to now, but you can make the argument of "what if" for many guys. What if Bernie Nicholls' son's health issues hadn't derailed his focus in the early 90s; would he become a HOF calibre legend? And things like that.

You, Kovalev10, unfortunately used some pretty subjective "what if's" in Guy's case. I think with or without the accident, he'd have retired anyway and if not, he'd still have tailed off. Now, if the rumoured trade with Edmonton in 1984 that's been brought up recently was okay with Guy, he could've coasted by being Gretz's winger despite his diminishing skills (heck, he could've gone drinkin' with MacTavish and went driving... oh, bad combination!) and starting a sick dynasty with the Oil. And Habs fans loved the guy so much, they'd be cheering him to more amazing feats in Edmonton. As long as he didn't have to inflict woe on the Habs in a stanley cup final down the road. I mean, his final game in Montreal and 2nd final vs. Montreal and all-time, back in 1991. He scores and the Forum erupted in a 5-minute applause. His comeback in 1988 with the Rangers where he scores 2. I saw one of his pretty goals, stripping Desjardins or somebody, taking the puck Lafleur style and wristing it between Roy's pads. The crowd goes nuts like the Habs just scored, it was unbelievable!!! Heck, I'd be cheering. If Koivu came back one day if we ever let him go and scored on us in a regular season game, I'd be cheering too. Though, not on a Lafleur-like level of worship.


Last edited by Hab-a-maniac: 10-24-2004 at 02:14 AM.
Hab-a-maniac is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 10:17 AM
  #32
Chili
Registered User
 
Chili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: la Belle Province
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 3,149
vCash: 500
I followed the Habs during Lafleur's days and from memory...

He did take several years to "find himself" in the NHL. He went from Junior, where he finished with one of the greatest careers in history, to the NHL where he was "only" expected to replace Jean Beliveau, one of the all time greats. The expectations in those days in Montreal were the Cup and anything less was unacceptable. I remember Beliveau himself explaining what it was like to play in Mtl. To paraphrase, he'd score two goals, the Habs had won the game and he'd be skating off the ice happy when a fan would call out, "Beliveau, you should have had 4 goals".

Lafleur took a few years to adjust to the league and the pressure of playing in Montreal. He took off the helmet for year 4 and coincidence or not that was when his career took off.

He was not happy in Mtl his last few years with the team, playing a defensive style, and I believe asked to be traded...and was told that he would not be dealt under any circumstances, so he retired.

As far as what if's? If he had played for another team, maybe he'd have more points, maybe not. The pressure/expectations would have been different. Maybe he would not have felt the need to retire. It's all speculation though.

Bottom line he had a great career. And he will probably always be my favorite player.

Chili is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 12:17 PM
  #33
KOVALEV10*
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Simply the best!
Posts: 3,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hab-a-maniac

So y'see it happened to the best of them. Granted, in Guy's prime (1978) he was with a reduced competition and 50% of the guys in the NHL were big smokers, big drinkers or both. That stat probably decreased every 13 years or so by 25% until now where it's maybe 1% smokers (Cigars every so often doesn't count obviously), and 5% big drinkers (lots of guys drink and party but about 5% probably are heavy drinkers/drunks). So to not be aware that drinking a lot and smoking reduces your ability to be a long-time, effective NHL star, is asinine. Injuries and personal problems can derail careers but with today's conditioning, there's no reason that if he wanted to, an NHL'er could play 20 years with a little luck and keeping in great shape. Guy had the former, but didn't do the latter in his 16 season career (you see, his enormous abilities made it that way but for his era, he could've made it all without a brief retirement period-he did so when he was just 33 and came back when he was 37).
So you're telling me Guy wouldn't have been so productive if he had played against better players?

KOVALEV10* is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 01:20 PM
  #34
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 40,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
So you're telling me Guy wouldn't have been so productive if he had played against better players?
you're clearly trolling now, give it a rest.

Stephen is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 01:53 PM
  #35
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,101
vCash: 500
I don't know if anyone caught TSN's showing of 1976 Canada/Russia a few nights ago. I followed the 70's Habs closely but I admit to forgetting how dominant Lafleur could be. You could list a lot of reasons as to why he declined after his 9th year. Did he decline because Lemaire reigned in his creativity or did he decline,causing Lemaire to insist on a more structured game. Lemaire not being a dummy would have gladly accepted 50-60 goals if he thought Guy could have scored them. I think he lost whatever it was that pushes you to be the best. He wanted it, but just didn't have a gear to go to anymore. There were physical reasons but I've always thought he was burnt out. Don't forget they had won 4 in a row against great competition. Bowman kept the heat turned up pretty high. They played in a city that panicked 8 times in the year they lost 8 games. When Bowman left, a few guys exhaled and never quite got the edge again, Shutt included,maybe Lapointe also. During the 6 years that he dominated, he was the best.

mcphee is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 02:35 PM
  #36
Chili
Registered User
 
Chili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: la Belle Province
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 3,149
vCash: 500
I watched the Canada Cup game the other night. The player who impressed me the most in that game was Gilbert Perreault. What a stickhandler.

Alot of the Habs dynasty started to move on (Lemaire, Cournoyer, Dryden, Pollock Bowman) and others started to age (i.e. Savard and Lapointe). Same pressure to win though and I'm sure that took a toll on Lafleur.

Chili is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 02:47 PM
  #37
looooob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,885
vCash: 500
this thread is hilarious, but anyways

to the original question

in 1979-1980 (before this all important car accident)

an 18 year old Wayne Gretzky, playing on a defacto expansion team scored 137 points

a 28 year old Guy Lafleur, playing on one of the deepest teams in NHL history scored 125 points

a teenage Gretzky outpaced Lafleur in the prime of his career

I think Lafleur is one of the top dozen players of all time. nothing wrong with that. I can't believe (and this coming from a diehard Flames fan) how many people seem intent on taking down Gretzky lately

looooob is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:18 PM
  #38
Chili
Registered User
 
Chili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: la Belle Province
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 3,149
vCash: 500
What I find funny is the media induced top 10, 25, 100, etc. lists. Unless someone saw the NHL from it's earliest beginnings then they are unqualified to make such lists...and since that should comprise everyone, then no one is really qualified to compare Cyclone Taylor to recent vintage players.

I think we should appreciate players careers without the need to slot them into an arbitrary and completely debatable list.

Chili is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:29 PM
  #39
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili
What I find funny is the media induced top 10, 25, 100, etc. lists. Unless someone saw the NHL from it's earliest beginnings then they are unqualified to make such lists...and since that should comprise everyone, then no one is really qualified to compare Cyclone Taylor to recent vintage players.

I think we should appreciate players careers without the need to slot them into an arbitrary and completely debatable list.
You got it right. You can't really compare players. How do you argue a Gretzky against an Orr. There purpose and responsibilies on the ice were totally different. It can be fun to compare generation to generation, but it gets invalid just for reasons of human growth,level of coaching,league wide style etc. When you are lucky enough to see an all time great in their prime, they are great in that moment. I saw Messier do things no other player could do as far as powre on skates. Lafleur and Gretzky could make passes that others wouldn't imagine. Orr played at a different level when healthy.Media outlets making lists get us to talk hockey but that's about it.

Chili, you mention Perreault, he was the best, or most exciting Jr. player I ever saw.I thought I was seeing Beliveau's reincarnation when I watched him in 69-70. He was always great to watch but never quite got to where I thought he would. Comparing him to Clarke is interesting from that era in that one was flashier, one made his team better.

mcphee is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:51 PM
  #40
hunter1909*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 387
vCash: 500
lafleur isnt even the greatest canadien ever...

ever heard of the rocket????

hunter1909* is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:56 PM
  #41
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D
I say no because his first three seasons he was barely top 6 forward, and in 1980 he got into a car accident.

It's like saying Mario would have had (maybe) a better career than Wayne if it wasn't for illness/injuries/etc. Well, IMO durability is a factored in when I see the overall strength of a player.

I remember reading an article that said Mario would have been the best player points wise if it wasn't for his cancer ordeal.

I'll stick to that, Mario is the best in my eyes and thats what i know.

I.am.ca is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:58 PM
  #42
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
this thread is hilarious, but anyways

to the original question

in 1979-1980 (before this all important car accident)

an 18 year old Wayne Gretzky, playing on a defacto expansion team scored 137 points

a 28 year old Guy Lafleur, playing on one of the deepest teams in NHL history scored 125 points

a teenage Gretzky outpaced Lafleur in the prime of his career

I think Lafleur is one of the top dozen players of all time. nothing wrong with that. I can't believe (and this coming from a diehard Flames fan) how many people seem intent on taking down Gretzky lately

Look at the other scoring leaders when Gretz first started out, the NHL was a joke. U can score from ur own end at least 2 times a game.

I.am.ca is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 03:58 PM
  #43
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter1909
lafleur isnt even the greatest canadien ever...

ever heard of the rocket????
So, go ahead, compare them. You are in rarified air when you look at the greatest Habs ever. Go thru Harvey to Beliveau to the Rocket to Lafleur and arguements can be made. Like Chili said, you can argue Morenz and Joliat for that matter, doesn't mean there's a right answer.

mcphee is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 05:21 PM
  #44
looooob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I.am.ca
Look at the other scoring leaders when Gretz first started out, the NHL was a joke. U can score from ur own end at least 2 times a game.
um thanks. Lafleur was playing at the same time, no?

I watched hockey regularly then. the NHL was more diluted then it is now, and scoring was obviously way up, but it doesn't matter. Gretzky as a scorer was so much better than anyone else (including elite players like Lafleur, Dionne and Perreault who were 10 years his senior) it wasn't even funny

looooob is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 05:23 PM
  #45
looooob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee

Chili, you mention Perreault, he was the best, or most exciting Jr. player I ever saw.I thought I was seeing Beliveau's reincarnation when I watched him in 69-70. He was always great to watch but never quite got to where I thought he would. Comparing him to Clarke is interesting from that era in that one was flashier, one made his team better.
I'll admit a bias in that Perreault was my favorite player growing up, but clearly he made his team better too....by 1975 he had an expansion team in the cup finals

he wasn't as effective as his peers (Clarke, Trottier) at leading his team to the big prize, but the bulk of Perreault's prime (say 75-83) was spent in the shadow of those great Hab and Isles teams

I do agree with you, there were holes in his game that make him a step down from the true elites of his era...but the post-expansion Sabres were a very very good team for along time, with him as their best player

looooob is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 07:27 PM
  #46
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
I'll admit a bias in that Perreault was my favorite player growing up, but clearly he made his team better too....by 1975 he had an expansion team in the cup finals

he wasn't as effective as his peers (Clarke, Trottier) at leading his team to the big prize, but the bulk of Perreault's prime (say 75-83) was spent in the shadow of those great Hab and Isles teams

I do agree with you, there were holes in his game that make him a step down from the true elites of his era...but the post-expansion Sabres were a very very good team for along time, with him as their best player
I don't know what in his game I could criticize other than the Sabres were a pretty good team that you would think would have won one. Being their best player, I guess part of that falls on him. If you swapped Clarke and Perreault would the 2 teams history be different ? Impossible question, but it goes to the discussion of lists, the situation a player is in,goes a long way in determining his legend. Gretzky would have been great if Hartford had bought him from Skalbania, but who knows how it would have turned out.

mcphee is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 07:35 PM
  #47
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
this thread is hilarious, but anyways

to the original question

in 1979-1980 (before this all important car accident)

an 18 year old Wayne Gretzky, playing on a defacto expansion team scored 137 points

a 28 year old Guy Lafleur, playing on one of the deepest teams in NHL history scored 125 points

a teenage Gretzky outpaced Lafleur in the prime of his career

I think Lafleur is one of the top dozen players of all time. nothing wrong with that. I can't believe (and this coming from a diehard Flames fan) how many people seem intent on taking down Gretzky lately
Got to agree with you. An 18 year old Gretzky, had 1 more point than Lafleur's career best 136pts. I love Lafleur, but they just weren't on the same planet offensively. Lafleur was a funner player to watch, but was nowhere near the offensive talent.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 09:34 PM
  #48
KOVALEV10*
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Simply the best!
Posts: 3,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Joe
Got to agree with you. An 18 year old Gretzky, had 1 more point than Lafleur's career best 136pts. I love Lafleur, but they just weren't on the same planet offensively. Lafleur was a funner player to watch, but was nowhere near the offensive talent.
Ya but dont forget Gretzky was soo much younger when he entered the NHL then Lafleur was at that time. Gretzky was about 17-18 and Lafleur was about 28-29 so theres a 10 year difference so you can't judge it like that.

KOVALEV10* is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 09:37 PM
  #49
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,900
vCash: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOVALEV10
Ya but dont forget Gretzky was soo much younger when he entered the NHL then Lafleur was at that time. Gretzky was about 17-18 and Lafleur was about 28-29 so theres a 10 year difference so you can't judge it like that.


Huh, do you think that 18 year olds are typically in their prime and 28 year olds are in their declining years? He was pointing out that in his FIRST YEAR, 19 YEAR old gretzky scored more than Lafleurs career BEST. Explain, please why that is a moot point, because it seems pretty relevant to the majority of us.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
10-25-2004, 09:43 PM
  #50
I.am.ca
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Langley
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
um thanks. Lafleur was playing at the same time, no?

I watched hockey regularly then. the NHL was more diluted then it is now, and scoring was obviously way up, but it doesn't matter. Gretzky as a scorer was so much better than anyone else (including elite players like Lafleur, Dionne and Perreault who were 10 years his senior) it wasn't even funny

What about the fact that he had a goon playing on his line so no one would touch him.

Who can't score if they have that much space during those days?

I'll stick with Mario, yeah he is a big guy at 6'4'', but 6' isn't small either. If Gretz had no goon on his line, i'd like to see how his back and body would have held up.

No arguments that Gretzky is awesome unselfish player, but you have to realize that he had alot of guys watching his back on his own line, guys that would never be on a top line on any other team like Semenko.

I.am.ca 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 04:51 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.