Wow slow down there buddy you are simply translating 80's stats to today without giving any reasons as to why that would happen.
Just because the 85/86 Oilers who were trying to outscore everyone and did so by that rate, doesn't mean that the same situation would occur today in a post lockout NHL.
That's part of the huge problem here is that some guys are simply translating the 80's to post lockout when so many things ahve changed and simply overlook it and say "well heck it's Wayne" and don't really look at it.
For one thing no team plays all out offense to try to outscore the other team any more and in a Cap era it's extremely unlikely that even a team lead by the "primest" of Wayne would be successful doing so.
At best we might see a Washington type of result depending on the team if that style was adopted (which like I said would be extremely unlikely)
The Washington Capitals did just that a few years ago. There is no reason why a team couldn't if they had the right collection of talent - guys like Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey.
I've seen some dumb stuff written on this board, but this one takes the cake. Yo, Lemieux saved the franchise at age 18, not when he was 27. The next time the pipsqueak does that will be the first. There is a huge load of difference between a player in his prime & a rookie kid. And yes, the Pens struggled even with him amassing a ton of points, but then again, the team did improve in the standings. The year prior to him arriving, that miserable team had only 38 points. After he got here, it shot up to 53 points, then into the 70s, 81 in '87-88 & finally made the playoffs in '88-89 with 87 points. Additionally, to state that a team only becomes good when it puts significant talent around its best player is kind of redundant.
Ah, the same in reverse is also true. Gretzky's best seasons happened when he himself had a very deep roster.
Clearly you didn't read the post I was responding to. Everything you complain about in my post was addressed in the post I made before and the post I quoted above. If you had, you'd realize my point was that both players had their best seasons with deep rosters, and expecting Gretzky to somehow better his performances in Edmonton when he was older and on a weaker team is stupid. No where did I say that Gretzky was better with a weak roster, which you'd have realized if you'd actually been following the conversation.
Prime Gretzky wouldn't have let Henrik Sedin even get close to him, let alone steal an Art Ross.
Um Henrik Sedin didn't steal anything from Crosby.
Crosby was a step below that year.. people look at the point totals and see him second not really fair... I mean in a meaningless last game of the season against the Islanders he got six points in one game.
Ovechkin missed 10 games had he played just two of those he would have won the Richard and Art Ross.
Um Henrik Sedin didn't steal anything from Crosby.
Crosby was a step below that year.. people look at the point totals and see him second not really fair... I mean in a meaningless last game of the season against the Islanders he got six points in one game.
Ovechkin missed 10 games had he played just two of those he would have won the Richard and Art Ross.
There was an active push by the Canucks about a perceived anti west bias, most years the Rocket co leader who finished only 3 points behind the scoring leader (Hank) and played in all situations, over 2 MPG more would ahve won the Hart easily.
It was very much like the Langway lash back with the Hart.
Of course all of the above assumes that Wayne is getting his 150 points every year, which is extremely debatable as we really don't know, it's more what supporters want us to believe, like it would be an automatic.
Ironically Sid seems to be making Kunitz into a 100 point guy (pro rated of course, so I guess Wayne could have as well.
The Washington Capitals did just that a few years ago. There is no reason why a team couldn't if they had the right collection of talent - guys like Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey.
Even so the goal totals of the Caps, who were the most offensive team since the lockout (or if another, it might be the Canucks, is it's still close, this is off the top of my head pretty sure the numbers will be close) averages around 260 Goals per season, there is still that huge difference that a Wayne led team would have to make up for him to get his points, in a much more defensive league.
Wow slow down there buddy you are simply translating 80's stats to today without giving any reasons as to why that would happen.
Just because the 85/86 Oilers who were trying to outscore everyone and did so by that rate, doesn't mean that the same situation would occur today in a post lockout NHL.
That's part of the huge problem here is that some guys are simply translating the 80's to post lockout when so many things ahve changed and simply overlook it and say "well heck it's Wayne" and don't really look at it.
For one thing no team plays all out offense to try to outscore the other team any more and in a Cap era it's extremely unlikely that even a team lead by the "primest" of Wayne would be successful doing so.
At best we might see a Washington type of result depending on the team if that style was adopted (which like I said would be extremely unlikely)
I don't understand why an arbitrary time like "the lockout" matters so much. Efforts were made to get more scoring in hockey, like removing the redline for off-sides, going back to the 4on4 (which, ironically, was put in place initially to SLOW DOWN Gretzky)
What was hockey like BEFORE Gretzky? When there was Lafleur, Dionne, Clarke, Mikita? Did the 80s change in isolation of Gretzky? or what HIS SPECIFIC impact on the game what changed the game? Not vice versa.
There's a difference between players coming into an era and the players that define the era. Would Coffey have existed if Orr didn't redefine the position? I don't believe hockey was much different. Gretzky ALWAYS faced top defensive pairings, top checkers, in any era. They all tried to stop him, nobody tried to outscore them. Gretzky was simply able to overcome the obstacles and produce at a rate close to DOUBLE other players, for pretty much his whole career.
That separation from other stars is unprecedented and incredible.
The nuances of rules, equipment are just as irrelevant as advertising on the boards, IMO. The elephant in the room was how good Gretzky was and how others around him benefited. From Blair McDonald to Jari Kurri to Bernie Nicholls to many others.
Look at the #s in the 80s, adjusted over 82 games played. good god. Sometimes numbers tell the whole story.
Gretzky has more assists than ANYONE else has points. Oh, the anyone else, is Mike Bossy.
That's over TEN years and more than 700 games for all players (except Bossy's 599)
Please tell me where Sedins, Thornton, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Tavares, Ovechkin belong on this list and under what possible circumstances they'd outscore anyone or come close to 192 points.
I don't know but Crosby is quite dominant and if you would remove Malkin and Ovechkin from the equation because during the years Gretzky played there were no Russians, he would be 0.33ppg higher then the guy behind him during the timespan between 06/07-12/13.
Quite some domination he got there.
Martin St louis: gp509 g188 a372 pt560
Joe Thornton: gp507 g139g a415 p554
Sidney Crosby: gp376 g195 a348 pt543
Even so the goal totals of the Caps, who were the most offensive team since the lockout (or if another, it might be the Canucks, is it's still close, this is off the top of my head pretty sure the numbers will be close) averages around 260 Goals per season, there is still that huge difference that a Wayne led team would have to make up for him to get his points, in a much more defensive league.
Alexander Ovechkin and Mike Green were no Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey.
Look at the #s in the 80s, adjusted over 82 games played. good god. Sometimes numbers tell the whole story.
Gretzky has more assists than ANYONE else has points. Oh, the anyone else, is Mike Bossy.
That's over TEN years and more than 700 games for all players (except Bossy's 599)
Please tell me where Sedins, Thornton, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Tavares, Ovechkin belong on this list and under what possible circumstances they'd outscore anyone or come close to 192 points.
era - shmera.
Yeah he was dominant no doubt, but i dont think it's fair to only include those players that played all ten years or however this is done. Bring in Lemieux and Yzerman as well, and whoever more that is forgotten about. It will still be highly dependant on where the players where in their respective careers at the time, but still more fair to get an acurate picture with as little snapshotness as possible. I mean, the only thing this graph proves is how much better Gretzky where than people born within five years of him, not counting Lemieux and Yzerman for some reason.
Wow slow down there buddy you are simply translating 80's stats to today without giving any reasons as to why that would happen.
Just because the 85/86 Oilers who were trying to outscore everyone and did so by that rate, doesn't mean that the same situation would occur today in a post lockout NHL.
That's part of the huge problem here is that some guys are simply translating the 80's to post lockout when so many things ahve changed and simply overlook it and say "well heck it's Wayne" and don't really look at it.
For one thing no team plays all out offense to try to outscore the other team any more and in a Cap era it's extremely unlikely that even a team lead by the "primest" of Wayne would be successful doing so.
At best we might see a Washington type of result depending on the team if that style was adopted (which like I said would be extremely unlikely)
So are you saying that the 100 point post 35, with a wonky back Gretzky was on teams trying to just outscore everyone else?
Or how about the early to mid 90's Kings?
By far the biggest answer I would like from you is where you believe Stastny and Bossy stack up offensively against the Sedin's, Giroux, Stamkos and Malkin?
Personally, I have Stastny and Bossy as good or better offensively than any of them and all Gretz did was BLOW THEM AWAY by incredible margins offensively.
So what exactly is your argument on this one?
Like seriously, I have no issue saying that Crosby is the best player today but he hasn't been topping the "Bossy's and Stastny's" of today by any where even REMOTELY close to the degree that Gretzky did.
Jagr put up better margins than Sid has and Jagr wasn't close to Gretzky's margins either.
Last edited by Rhiessan71: 03-05-2013 at 01:47 PM.
So are you saying that the 100 point post 35, with a wonky back Gretzky was on teams trying to just outscore everyone else?
Or how about the early to mid 90's Kings?
By far the biggest answer I would like from you is where you believe Stastny and Bossy stack up offensively against the Sedin's, Giroux, Stamkos and Malkin?
Personally, I have Stastny and Bossy as good or better offensively than any of them and all Gretz did was BLOW THEM AWAY by incredible margins offensively.
So what exactly is your argument on this one?
Like seriously, I have no issue saying that Crosby is the best player today but he hasn't been topping the "Bossy's and Stastny's" of today by any where even REMOTELY close to the degree that Gretzky did.
Jagr put up better margins than Sid has and Jagr wasn't close to Gretzky's margins either.
I would love this answer as well, a point I've made several times that has never been addressed.
And with time, I'm sure I can post the top consecutive 7-8 seasons of players spanning several eras, in their primes, and still show how Gretzky dwarfed them even though he HIMSELF was helping elevate the stats (such as teammates Kurri/Coffey/Messier) that he also dwarfed.
But what's the point. Some of the naysayers will find a flaw into anything, stats or non.
But I'd love for someone to address the bolded.
I think Gretzky was pretty much that much better (as the stats show) than Bossy, Trottier, Stastny, Savard, Hawerchuk - in their primes at that time.
Does anyone not believe that Bossy or Stastny playing today wouldn't be a top 10 scorer?
And even if one could make some silly argument against this (Phil freakin Kessel was 6th in league scoring last season), one could not say with even the barest shred of credibility that they would be far out of the top 10.
These are guys that in their highest seasons, Gretzky was blowing away by margins as ridiculously high as 50%!!!
So are you saying that the 100 point post 35, with a wonky back Gretzky was on teams trying to just outscore everyone else?
Or how about the early to mid 90's Kings?
By far the biggest answer I would like from you is where you believe Stastny and Bossy stack up offensively against the Sedin's, Giroux, Stamkos and Malkin?
Personally, I have Stastny and Bossy as good or better offensively than any of them and all Gretz did was BLOW THEM AWAY by incredible margins offensively.
So what exactly is your argument on this one?
Like seriously, I have no issue saying that Crosby is the best player today but he hasn't been topping the "Bossy's and Stastny's" of today by any where even REMOTELY close to the degree that Gretzky did.
Jagr put up better margins than Sid has and Jagr wasn't close to Gretzky's margins either.
Even so the goal totals of the Caps, who were the most offensive team since the lockout (or if another, it might be the Canucks, is it's still close, this is off the top of my head pretty sure the numbers will be close) averages around 260 Goals per season, there is still that huge difference that a Wayne led team would have to make up for him to get his points, in a much more defensive league.
By your own numbers, 160 points isn't that far off. 260 goals/season, plus you add Gretzky's contributions to that (let us say it increases 20%) * 0.5 = 156 points.
Mario Lemieux, in 2000-2001, contributed to 45% of his team's goals while he was on the ice. Pittsburgh scored 275 goals that year. That year, they scored at a pace of 3.91 goals a game with Lemieux on the ice, and 2.74 goals/game with Lemieux off the ice, with an average of about 3.4 goals/game. So, it looks like Lemieux, increased his team's scoring by ~43%.
In 2011-2012, Pittsburgh scored 282 goals. Not quite the 300+ Washington scored a few years before that, but higher than some other leaders in other years. Under that scenario, playing a full 82 games Lemieux would have about 180 points on that year. Mind you, a 35-year old Lemieux with injuries and staleness.
So there is no question in my mind that Gretzky could have gotten 160+ points.
Last edited by OrrNumber4: 03-05-2013 at 11:14 PM.
I don't understand why an arbitrary time like "the lockout" matters so much. Efforts were made to get more scoring in hockey, like removing the redline for off-sides, going back to the 4on4 (which, ironically, was put in place initially to SLOW DOWN Gretzky)
What was hockey like BEFORE Gretzky? When there was Lafleur, Dionne, Clarke, Mikita? Did the 80s change in isolation of Gretzky? or what HIS SPECIFIC impact on the game what changed the game? Not vice versa.
There's a difference between players coming into an era and the players that define the era. Would Coffey have existed if Orr didn't redefine the position? I don't believe hockey was much different. Gretzky ALWAYS faced top defensive pairings, top checkers, in any era. They all tried to stop him, nobody tried to outscore them. Gretzky was simply able to overcome the obstacles and produce at a rate close to DOUBLE other players, for pretty much his whole career.
That separation from other stars is unprecedented and incredible.
The nuances of rules, equipment are just as irrelevant as advertising on the boards, IMO. The elephant in the room was how good Gretzky was and how others around him benefited. From Blair McDonald to Jari Kurri to Bernie Nicholls to many others.
While Wayne did indeed define his generation in the NHL, just like Orr before him, to dismiss the vast differences in the landscape of the NHL from 1965 to 1973 to 1984 to 2006, like you did in the bolded part makes your comment in the bolded part completely contrary to the actual truth of how different the NHL was at those different points in history.
Why people keep on pretending that there is little or no difference is beyond me.
While Wayne did indeed define his generation in the NHL, just like Orr before him, to dismiss the vast differences in the landscape of the NHL from 1965 to 1973 to 1984 to 2006, like you did in the bolded part makes your comment in the bolded part completely contrary to the actual truth of how different the NHL was at those different points in history.
Why people keep on pretending that there is little or no difference is beyond me.
There is a difference, but not so gargantuan.
We see players like Jagr and Selanne dominating in old age, players like Lemieux returning and putting up great numbers, and make logical conclusions.
Alexander Ovechkin and Mike Green were no Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey.
You are right they are not, but AO was built to be a goalscorer in the post lockout era, it's debatable if Wayne would have had the goal scoring success that AO has, until his recent decline. That being said Wayne's preparation is the best of all time and that would help him but I'm not very sure that he would be able to get near to replicating his goal scoring success of the early 80's.
Green is an all offensive version of Coffey, Karlsson is a better example and we saw what his peak is so far and it's unlikely that nay Dman and especially not Coffey (with his defensive limitations) would be able to score over 90 points period even in the most perfect of situations in the post lockout era.
Take any team in the league and replace their top C with Wayne and their top Dman with Coffey and I highly doubt that we see Wayne being able to score that 150 points plus that people are throwing out there IMO.
I see people talking hypothetical about his 150 points but on what actual team does that take place?
Pittsburgh minus Sid and Letang and add Wayne and Coffey, I doubt it.
It's not that I think so little of Wayne, he is my #1 after all, it's just really really hard to score in the NHL today for many reasons.
