HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

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

Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky? Will we know it?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-08-2013, 01:15 AM
  #451
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes I know we can't say anything about the guys in the 80's, as per the sticky, but the current guys suck right?....okay must be a good vintage this evening my friend.
... um, whats a "sticky"? And ya, not bad, saucy little red from Portugal.
Goes with everything except Butterflys. Not really into bugs. Anyhoo, no
Hv, not overly enamoured with The State of Goaltending these days. Just
why anyone would drop like that?... like Custer at the Battle of Bighorn.
Arthritic Englishman too long in the saddle with rotten teeth, exhausted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
My dear, I've watched Gretzky since early 1980s.
Yes? And as a born & bred Southern Ontario Boy I first heard about this Wunderkind far, far earlier. You point to his "great supporting cast in Edmonton"?. Explain please, 378 Goals & 139 Assists in a single season with the Brantford Nadrofsky Steelers, playing 3yrs over his age, about 79lbs soaking wet? In Toronto with the Nats, something insane to the tune of 70pts in like 10 games before moving on? Are you serious? Im not much older than Gretzky, grew up back there playing elite hockey, goalie, and I sure as **** never saw the like of it. There was some serious talent around. Steve Shutt, John Anderson in terms of snipers at the AAA & Jr levels, strings & decades worth. High scoring or rough & ready. Whatever you wanted. But this kid?! Your sadly mistaken on this point Mr. Yamaguchi. Total Prodigy. You cant just discount, remove his amateur career, expect anyone in the know to just accept that he did what he did because of a "supporting cast" at the professional levels. Partially taught sure, but bottom line, innate. No idea why you would even go there, as surely you must appreciate I or others will absolutely get right in your face.

Killion is online now  
Old
03-08-2013, 01:45 AM
  #452
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
There is no doubt that Sid is alot better than Wayne was at the two way game, we have plenty of regular season statistical evidence to see that (as well for those that are old enough the eye test as well).

Wayne at his peak with the Oilers played a ":we will simply outscore you style of hockey and we don't care how many goals we give up" style.

None of the "Wayne would score 150 plus easy crowd" has addressed how the current NHL would tolerate that type of play, as the goal of all teams is to win right?
We saw the 2010 Capitals score 318 goals and play a free wheeling game where their main concentration was on offense. Oveckin and Backstrom each had over 100 points. Green was the most offensive defenseman in the game and they still had Semin in there. If not for the miracles Halak pulled the Caps wouldn't have changed their style at all. So we saw a team as recent as 2010 do a very Oilersesque type of offense. Even today, I'd say Pittsburgh still plays that "we'll outscore you" type of mentality. How often do they leave Fleury out to dry? A lot like the Oilers did with Fuhr. And no one on these teams was like Gretzky either so you can imagine if someone even more offensively gifted was on these teams. He'd be part owner.

I don't think a coach would need to "tolerate" much if his star player is wiping out the rest of the NHL in the scoring race. Any coach worth his salt is going to know that this player needs to be left to do his thing and in the end it will benefit the team better.

I guess a good modern example is Peyton Manning in the NFL. The running joke is that he has always been the offensive co-ordinator on the team despite having a coach for that position. You pretty much let Peyton Manning have his way with the plays and the offense and he is going to win you more games than not. So yeah, think about that but an even better player in his sport (Gretzky) who won more and it shouldn't be hard to understand why a coach would be smart enough to let him have a long leash.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanwb View Post
I agree with everything you just said with no exceptions. Where we differ is in the details, obviously. Gretzky may very well have caused other coaches to change their game plan which led to the high flying era of the 80s and early 90s. I'm not going to debate that, but my point was that those times are past. IF Gretzky were to come in to today's league, which is unarguably better coached defensively, other teams wouldn't necessarily change to a freewheeling style of hockey, because while Gretzky's team would be successful, the also rans of the league often have to compensate by playing a defense first game due to their insufficient talent level. Like you said, it just took until 95 or so before they actually figured this out it seems.

So sure there have always been bottom feeders, but Columbus doesn't beat the Penguins 11-0. Ever. (At least I doubt it ) The game isn't like that anymore, that's my only point. I don't want to nitpick about the details, I agree that Gretzky 2.0 would absolutely put on a clinic in today's NHL, but not enough that he would come close to the records he put up in the past. That's all.
Gretzky also slowed down by the mid 1990s as well. He couldn't score at will. He wasn't the best player in the game anymore and his offense alone wouldn't win you most games. He was getting 100 points, not 200. Despite the NHL being more offensive in the 1980s do you really think Al Arbour or Mike Keenan didn't have a plan of attack against Gretzky? These are coaches that went against him in the Cup final multiple times. I know people think a player like Gretzky would be stopped in today's game but what do you think they were doing in the 1980s? They were "trying" to stop him too. They just couldn't because he was that good.

I also think the NHL is just as much of a copycat league as it has ever been. Witness Anaheim winning the Cup in 2007. They were a tough team. They fought a lot. All of the sudden fighting took a jump in the 2007-'08 season. Teams thought this was the way to go. You saw the same thing with the Devils, or the Panthers in the mid 1990s. Less skilled teams exploited the clutch and grab game and perfected it with a patient defensive game. Bad for hockey, but who cares if you are winning right? Well, lots of teams followed suit. If Gretzky was getting 170+ points in today's game I can guarantee you teams would still be racking their brains trying to find a way to beat him. Or they'd join him and just hope to out gun him. I think the mistake we are making is that a player like Gretzky was much more superior to Crosby or Malkin so the mindset is that a player like this can't make this much impact. But it is a player like no other. I don't think Crosby has that impact around the league that Gretzky had.

Big Phil is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 02:35 AM
  #453
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Less skilled teams exploited the clutch and grab game and perfected it with a patient defensive game. Bad for hockey, but who cares if you are winning right?
Pretty much. Neutral Zone Traps. Left Wing Locks. Kitty Bar the Door. Whatever it takes you just better win or your unemployed, demoted. Way back in the day, Carl Brewer, a rushing defenceman pre-Orr, a guy who marched to the sound of his own drummer, bemoaning Imlach's "Trap" of defensively stifling hockey that brought Cups' to Toronto all through the 60's stated just before he quit the Leafs altogether while still in his 20's & one of the premier defencemen of his era said; "Who cares? 16,000 screaming fans just want a win. They dont care if its pretty or not, and Im not prepared to continue to be playing that style of hockey". Felt like an animal in a Zoo. Walked. As far as Im concerned, that took guts, showed self respect, integrity.

Killion is online now  
Old
03-08-2013, 05:55 AM
  #454
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
... um, whats a "sticky"? And ya, not bad, saucy little red from Portugal.
Goes with everything except Butterflys. Not really into bugs. Anyhoo, no
Hv, not overly enamoured with The State of Goaltending these days. Just
why anyone would drop like that?... like Custer at the Battle of Bighorn.
Arthritic Englishman too long in the saddle with rotten teeth, exhausted.



Yes? And as a born & bred Southern Ontario Boy I first heard about this Wunderkind far, far earlier. You point to his "great supporting cast in Edmonton"?. Explain please, 378 Goals & 139 Assists in a single season with the Brantford Nadrofsky Steelers, playing 3yrs over his age, about 79lbs soaking wet? In Toronto with the Nats, something insane to the tune of 70pts in like 10 games before moving on? Are you serious? Im not much older than Gretzky, grew up back there playing elite hockey, goalie, and I sure as **** never saw the like of it. There was some serious talent around. Steve Shutt, John Anderson in terms of snipers at the AAA & Jr levels, strings & decades worth. High scoring or rough & ready. Whatever you wanted. But this kid?! Your sadly mistaken on this point Mr. Yamaguchi. Total Prodigy. You cant just discount, remove his amateur career, expect anyone in the know to just accept that he did what he did because of a "supporting cast" at the professional levels. Partially taught sure, but bottom line, innate. No idea why you would even go there, as surely you must appreciate I or others will absolutely get right in your face.

Killion, I only watched Gretzky in the NHL and international competitions. I did not consider Gretzky's amateur career.

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 06:03 AM
  #455
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
Makes sense.
1. The players he nearly doubled in points each year, including after he went to another team.
2. The player he also out scored by a wide margin
3. Of course, all the other, non NHL superstars that Gretzky also dominated in every world tournament, head to head.

Wake up. The lockout is over.



1. You're exaggerating. Since Gretzky left the Oilers, Messier got more Hart trophies than him. The Oilers won the Cup without Gretzky. Gretzky couldn't win the Cup without the Oilers.

2. Lemieux outscored Gretzky several times starting from 1987-88. Many people consider Mario a greater player than the Great One.

3. Gretzky had ONLY ONE game against the Soviets in which you can say he dominated - game 2 of the Canada Cup finals 1987 (five assists, thanks to Lemieux who was able to convert his passes).
In other years, in the crucial contests versus the Russians, Gretzky was not that impressive:
1981 final - absolute zero
1984 semi - one assist

Please, be nice.

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 09:24 AM
  #456
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
1. You're exaggerating. Since Gretzky left the Oilers, Messier got more Hart trophies than him. The Oilers won the Cup without Gretzky. Gretzky couldn't win the Cup without the Oilers.

2. Lemieux outscored Gretzky several times starting from 1987-88. Many people consider Mario a greater player than the Great One.

3. Gretzky had ONLY ONE game against the Soviets in which you can say he dominated - game 2 of the Canada Cup finals 1987 (five assists, thanks to Lemieux who was able to convert his passes).
In other years, in the crucial contests versus the Russians, Gretzky was not that impressive:
1981 final - absolute zero
1984 semi - one assist

Please, be nice.
1) To quote Yamaguchi, in a world where Mario Lemieux never made the Finals...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
even without the Cups, Lemieux is a solid #2 of all time
Now we know that Cup Counting is important when it diminishes Gretzky. It is unimportant when assessing Lemieux's place in history.

And if Harts are the determining factor, what about the fact that Mario Lemieux doesn't have more Harts than Messier in the period after Gretzky left the Oilers? Are Mess and Lemieux equals now?

Of course, we're throwing out 8 Hart Trophies from the 1980s because Gretzky had Messier, Kurri, and Coffey. Gretzky outscored Messier, Kurri, and Coffey by an amount that is greater than what Mario Lemieux could do with Rob Brown, Jaromir Jagr.

2) Gretzky also outscored Lemieux several times after 1987-88 too. And every time before that. Keep Lemieux's insane powerplay time in mind, because Lemieux doesn't start outscoring him at even strength until after Gretzky's back injury.

3) Gretzky flips his rebound to Lemieux leaving him a 24 square foot opening to shoot at from three feet away. It's a good thing Mario was there to finish! That Gretzky guy could never get assists without Mario...

In your "crucial" games, Gretzky has 10 points in 5 games from 1981-87 against the Soviets. Expand to non-crucial and I believe he's still at 2 PPG.

Not as great as he did when he was playing against Mario Lemieux, but consistently great considering the opposition.

From 89-90 going forward, Gretzky still wins three scoring titles with point totals that no USSR-born player has ever matched, and against the Russian-filled Red Wings his scoring levels were about the same as they were against everyone else.

blogofmike is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 09:30 AM
  #457
redbull
2k17
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,425
vCash: 500


There's a lot of superstars, HHOFers on this list.

There's overwhelming evidence of this separation from other players, at all levels, minor hockey, junior, NHL, international, NHL playoffs.

You can slice numbers and eras and talk about systems and equipment and even ignore what the eyes tell you. But when the numbers are this consistently overwhelming, suggest that Gretzky would not dominate today is pretty laughable.

redbull is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 09:37 AM
  #458
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
1. You're exaggerating. Since Gretzky left the Oilers, Messier got more Hart trophies than him. The Oilers won the Cup without Gretzky. Gretzky couldn't win the Cup without the Oilers.

2. Lemieux outscored Gretzky several times starting from 1987-88. Many people consider Mario a greater player than the Great One.

3. Gretzky had ONLY ONE game against the Soviets in which you can say he dominated - game 2 of the Canada Cup finals 1987 (five assists, thanks to Lemieux who was able to convert his passes).
In other years, in the crucial contests versus the Russians, Gretzky was not that impressive:
1981 final - absolute zero
1984 semi - one assist

Please, be nice.
1. You are measuring Gretzky by how many Harts he won post-edmonton vs Messier, but dismissing how many Harts Gretzky won with Edmonton? Seems like you're picking and choosing. Also, Gretzky more than doubled that supporting cast in Edmonton two years in a row. Many seasons he had more assists than any of them had points. While its true a great supporting cast helped him win championships, he put up 92 goals and 212 points when no one on his line even broke 90 points.

2. Mario was 4 years younger and by the 90's was on a better team. Given that he was the only player we've seen near Gretzky's level of offense, it shouldn't be surprising that he was able to outscore Gretzky several times. Gretzky also outscored him several times as well - mostly when he was on a better team than Lemieux. Either way, Lemieux and Gretzky have been discussed to death. Suffice to say they are both top 4 of all time on any credible list.

3. Gretzky led all 4 Canada Cups in scoring though. He was MVP twice, Lemieux wasn't. Picking individual games against the Soviets again seems to be highly selective. I guess the rest of the tournament didn't count?
1981 - Canada lost 8-1. Sure Gretzky didn't do anything. But neither did anyone else, clearly. Otherwise it isn't an 8-1 game.
1984 - Gretzky was MVP
1987 Gretzky had points in all 3 final games against the Soviets. Not sure why you'd dismiss the other games in that series just because he didn't put up 5 points in them. Lemieux didn't get 5 points in any of them, but you seem to be pimping him. He was also MVP again, of course, but everyone knew that.

However, you didn't address the main point of my first response to you - which was my question about what criteria you could possibly use to put both Fedorov and Lemieux both ahead of Gretzky since both were worse offensively, and Lemieux was worse defensively.

shazariahl is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 11:21 AM
  #459
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shazariahl View Post
1. You are measuring Gretzky by how many Harts he won post-edmonton vs Messier, but dismissing how many Harts Gretzky won with Edmonton? Seems like you're picking and choosing. Also, Gretzky more than doubled that supporting cast in Edmonton two years in a row. Many seasons he had more assists than any of them had points. While its true a great supporting cast helped him win championships, he put up 92 goals and 212 points when no one on his line even broke 90 points.

2. Mario was 4 years younger and by the 90's was on a better team. Given that he was the only player we've seen near Gretzky's level of offense, it shouldn't be surprising that he was able to outscore Gretzky several times. Gretzky also outscored him several times as well - mostly when he was on a better team than Lemieux. Either way, Lemieux and Gretzky have been discussed to death. Suffice to say they are both top 4 of all time on any credible list.

3. Gretzky led all 4 Canada Cups in scoring though. He was MVP twice, Lemieux wasn't. Picking individual games against the Soviets again seems to be highly selective. I guess the rest of the tournament didn't count?
1981 - Canada lost 8-1. Sure Gretzky didn't do anything. But neither did anyone else, clearly. Otherwise it isn't an 8-1 game.
1984 - Gretzky was MVP
1987 Gretzky had points in all 3 final games against the Soviets. Not sure why you'd dismiss the other games in that series just because he didn't put up 5 points in them. Lemieux didn't get 5 points in any of them, but you seem to be pimping him. He was also MVP again, of course, but everyone knew that.

However, you didn't address the main point of my first response to you - which was my question about what criteria you could possibly use to put both Fedorov and Lemieux both ahead of Gretzky since both were worse offensively, and Lemieux was worse defensively.

1. If his supporting cast in Edmonton was so rubbish, how on earth they have managed to win the Cup without Gretzky in 1990?

2. Yes, Lemieux was 4 years younger. And it took him exactly 4 seasons to become the NHL top scorer.

3.
1984 Canada Cup MVP was John Tonnelli


1987 - it was Lemieux who scored both game winning goals against the Soviets. Plus, Lemieux got a hat trick against the Russians in Game 2. He totalled 11 goals in 9 games. Gretzky was more of a set up guy for Mario.

1981 - well, at least Clark Gillies scored a goal.

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 11:23 AM
  #460
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Killion, I only watched Gretzky in the NHL and international competitions. I did not consider Gretzky's amateur career.
Ya, ordinarily one wouldnt give a whole lot of shrift to a players amateur career, indeed, Junior, NCAA far more telling, its what they do at the professional levels that really counts. However, in the case of a once in a lifetimer like Gretzky, I think its important to take into account his amateur career as it completes the picture, gives one a better understanding in totality. There are of course all kinds of examples of one time prodigies who failed to live up to their potential, but when they do, best to be looking at it.

Killion is online now  
Old
03-08-2013, 11:43 AM
  #461
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Ya, ordinarily one wouldnt give a whole lot of shrift to a players amateur career, indeed, Junior, NCAA far more telling, its what they do at the professional levels that really counts. However, in the case of a once in a lifetimer like Gretzky, I think its important to take into account his amateur career as it completes the picture, gives one a better understanding in totality. There are of course all kinds of examples of one time prodigies who failed to live up to their potential, but when they do, best to be looking at it.

Excellent post. Cheers

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:00 PM
  #462
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 29,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
1. If his supporting cast in Edmonton was so rubbish, how on earth they have managed to win the Cup without Gretzky in 1990?
1990 Conn Smythe: Bill Ranford. That is your answer. His stats line from that year sticks out from his career record like a sore thumb, and is indicative of him playing "above his head" that post season. Probably the best season of his career. Craig Simpson burying 16 goals (for a whopping 38% shooting percentage in the post season), including 3 game-winners, also helped. Wasn't able to reproduce that the following year ("only" 5 goals in 18 games), and Edmonton wasn't able to keep up with Minnesota's scoring pace in the conference final.

So, to recap: goalie has the best run of his career, and they were led in scoring by a player that (to my knowledge) never finished higher than 5th in regular season point totals on the team. Goaltending and scoring from stars AND depth players. Tell me if you've heard that one before as a recipe for playoff success or "catching lightning in a bottle".

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:20 PM
  #463
rwb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Gretzky also slowed down by the mid 1990s as well. He couldn't score at will. He wasn't the best player in the game anymore and his offense alone wouldn't win you most games. He was getting 100 points, not 200. Despite the NHL being more offensive in the 1980s do you really think Al Arbour or Mike Keenan didn't have a plan of attack against Gretzky? These are coaches that went against him in the Cup final multiple times. I know people think a player like Gretzky would be stopped in today's game but what do you think they were doing in the 1980s? They were "trying" to stop him too. They just couldn't because he was that good.
Sure he was that good, I've seen him play. I understand your point about coaching, but there is no way you can compare the coaching from the 70s, 80s or 90s to today. Yes a guy like Arbour or Keenan had a damned good gameplan written up to stop Gretzky, but it's a lot easier to do now with the systems and improved goaltending than it was back then. I just feel that the game is drastically different. Too much of an emphasis on defense first from everyone that a guy like Gretzky never gets a chance to put up his gaudy numbers. That doesn't mean he doesn't still dominate though. I think he is the best player in today's NHL by a large margin.

Its just that today rushes are stymied instantly. Everyone backchecks hard now, because if you don't someone who does will take your job. Goaltenders are bigger, faster, and have improved their technique to the point where if you give up 1 in every 10 shots you're a below average goalie. That would have been among the very best in the league (probably by a decent margin to boot) when Wayne was playing. You can't just say Wayne would get a ridiculous amount of point totals now because he did back then. You have to adjust your view and take what he did with a grain of salt and a good dose of reality.

It's like saying we could transplant Gretzky back to the 20s before forward passes were allowed and he would still get 200 points. It just doesn't seem kosher to me.

rwb is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:23 PM
  #464
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Dear Ohashi_Jouzu,

I'm not trying to be rude but who cares about Simpson's stats in a regular season?? He was a solid postseason performer. He proved it in the 1988 Stanley Cup playoffs (I guess he tallied 13 goals as a part of the Gretzky's Supporting Cast), therefore his productivity in 1990 was not a fluke.

Ranford - he has replaced Grant Fuhr in net and done his job. But I wouldn't say that Ranford and Simpson have single-handedly (or shall I say double-handedly) won the Cup for Edmonton.

There were guys like Messier, Anderson, Lowe, Huddy, Gregg, Tikkanen, Kurri on that Oilers team. They have done a terrific job.

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:41 PM
  #465
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
1. If his supporting cast in Edmonton was so rubbish, how on earth they have managed to win the Cup without Gretzky in 1990?

2. Yes, Lemieux was 4 years younger. And it took him exactly 4 seasons to become the NHL top scorer.

3.
1984 Canada Cup MVP was John Tonnelli


1987 - it was Lemieux who scored both game winning goals against the Soviets. Plus, Lemieux got a hat trick against the Russians in Game 2. He totalled 11 goals in 9 games. Gretzky was more of a set up guy for Mario.

1981 - well, at least Clark Gillies scored a goal.
1. I never said they were rubbish. I said he over doubled any of them in points back to back years. Which he did. You are inferring that means they are rubbish. It really just means he was that much better than them those particular years.

2. Because Gretzky was injured. If you're going by "injuries are part of the game", it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to argue that Mario was better. You seem to have some huge double standards. You want to reward Fedorov for two way play and punish Gretzky while overlooking Lemieux's lack of two way play. You want to say Lemieux was better because he scored more points when Gretzky was injured, but then overlook Lemieux's injury ridden career and ignore Gretzky superior stats. You keep picking and choosing when to apply what rules to who.

3. You're correct, my bad. That's what I get from going by memory instead of fact checking.

As for the 87 Canada Cup, you make it sound like Gretzky setting up all those goals was somehow unimportant. Mario had 0 points in game 2 until he got moved to Wayne line, then scored a hat trick, all set up by Wayne. Wayne also set up 2 goals without Lemieux too. The fact is Mario scored as many points in the finals as he did the rest of the tournament. Most his goals were either on the PP with Gretzky, or after getting moved onto a line with Gretzky. He was less effective in the round robin portion of the tournament by far.

You still haven't given me any reason why Fedorov was better than Gretzky.


Last edited by shazariahl: 03-08-2013 at 12:50 PM.
shazariahl is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:56 PM
  #466
rwb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shazariahl View Post
Most his goals were either on the PP with Gretzky
I still can't get over how awesome the powerplay is.

Messier, Lemieux, Bourque, Coffey...and oh yeah, Wayne Freakin' Gretzky.

rwb is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:57 PM
  #467
Mad Max
Registered User
 
Mad Max's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DDO, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 233
vCash: 500
No. Even if his numbers are marginally inflated, his domination has never been matched at any point. The only player EVER who had even the slightest chance of matching his dominance would have been a healthy Mario Lemieux.

Mad Max is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 01:02 PM
  #468
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,319
vCash: 408
I'm doubtful we will see a more impactful player than the Great One. And his stats will live forever, unless the size of the net is increased or they go to 4 on 4.

but, if/when the game sees its first athletic specimen in the body of a Lebron James or Bo Jackson, it is possible they will say this player is better than Gretzky was (and it might be true). You might say that Lemieux was hockey's Lebron, but i still don't think the game has had a specimen that we would call the world's best athlete.

Up the Irons is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 01:18 PM
  #469
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanwb View Post
I still can't get over how awesome the powerplay is.

Messier, Lemieux, Bourque, Coffey...and oh yeah, Wayne Freakin' Gretzky.
True that.

shazariahl is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 02:58 PM
  #470
redbull
2k17
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
I'm doubtful we will see a more impactful player than the Great One. And his stats will live forever, unless the size of the net is increased or they go to 4 on 4.
remember when they got rid of 4on4 for coincidental minors to try and SLOW DOWN 99 & the Oilers advantage? Seems like the league was trying to slow them down whereas now it's the complete opposite. More 4on4, no redline, overtime, no holding, no stick contact above the waist....etc etc etc

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanwb View Post
I still can't get over how awesome the powerplay is.

Messier, Lemieux, Bourque, Coffey...and oh yeah, Wayne Freakin' Gretzky.
Nobody can watch that series and suggest the level of play isn't far and away above what we see on the ice today. The speed, skill level and competitiveness on the ice is the best hockey I've ever seen. And even in that context, it's quite impressive how much Gretzky and Lemieux outshine the other superstars.

redbull is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 03:21 PM
  #471
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 8,025
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Assuming ice hockey remains a popular participated sport in enough regions, yes ....

His numbers and records may well stand for a very very very very long time as a product of his generation and environment, but it is absolutely ignorant to say a player won't reach the subjective, visual, competitive and peer domination that Gretzky achieved at same point.

In 100 years time, assuming the sport is still played a semi large scale, there is no way the top 4 GOAT list is not different.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 04:11 PM
  #472
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
... ignorant to say a player won't reach the subjective, visual, competitive and peer domination that Gretzky achieved at same point.
I dont know that its ignorance, more a pessimistic perspective, that humans, the game of hockey wont evolve, the genius strain of a Gretzky like the Hale-Bopp Comet, once every 2000yr event, maybe, next visiting in like 4280 or something. To suggest another Gretzky, then another after wont come along with far greater frequency than that celestial orb is almost akin to stating that there is no life beyond planet Earth, that were all alone in the Universe. Nonsense....

Killion is online now  
Old
03-08-2013, 04:27 PM
  #473
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shazariahl View Post
1. I never said they were rubbish. I said he over doubled any of them in points back to back years. Which he did. You are inferring that means they are rubbish. It really just means he was that much better than them those particular years.

2. Because Gretzky was injured. If you're going by "injuries are part of the game", it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to argue that Mario was better. You seem to have some huge double standards. You want to reward Fedorov for two way play and punish Gretzky while overlooking Lemieux's lack of two way play. You want to say Lemieux was better because he scored more points when Gretzky was injured, but then overlook Lemieux's injury ridden career and ignore Gretzky superior stats. You keep picking and choosing when to apply what rules to who.

3. You're correct, my bad. That's what I get from going by memory instead of fact checking.

As for the 87 Canada Cup, you make it sound like Gretzky setting up all those goals was somehow unimportant. Mario had 0 points in game 2 until he got moved to Wayne line, then scored a hat trick, all set up by Wayne. Wayne also set up 2 goals without Lemieux too. The fact is Mario scored as many points in the finals as he did the rest of the tournament. Most his goals were either on the PP with Gretzky, or after getting moved onto a line with Gretzky. He was less effective in the round robin portion of the tournament by far.

You still haven't given me any reason why Fedorov was better than Gretzky.



Why Fedorov? I do not have to give you reasons. Please ask Gretzky, ask Scottie Bowman.

Here are the quotes:

Heaven on Ice: Ray Sheppard's Life in Hockey - page 228:

During the 1993–94 NHL season, being interviewed before his game, Gretzky was talking about a 17 December match between the Detroit Red Wings and New York Rangers, and said "he had never seen a player dominate the game the way Sergei did'".

Scottie Bowman said in 2009:

"I talked to Wayne Gretzky about that six or seven years ago and he said to me: 'I couldn't play forward and defence. Mario couldn't do it. Jagr couldn't play defense. But Sergei could. He was a hell of a player'."

Yamaguchi* is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 05:39 PM
  #474
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 29,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Dear Ohashi_Jouzu,

I'm not trying to be rude but who cares about Simpson's stats in a regular season?? He was a solid postseason performer. He proved it in the 1988 Stanley Cup playoffs (I guess he tallied 13 goals as a part of the Gretzky's Supporting Cast), therefore his productivity in 1990 was not a fluke.

Ranford - he has replaced Grant Fuhr in net and done his job. But I wouldn't say that Ranford and Simpson have single-handedly (or shall I say double-handedly) won the Cup for Edmonton.

There were guys like Messier, Anderson, Lowe, Huddy, Gregg, Tikkanen, Kurri on that Oilers team. They have done a terrific job.
And I'm not trying to be rude either, but you asked "how on earth they have managed to win the Cup without Gretzky in 1990?" as if you actually had no clue. Picking up Simpson part way through the '87/88 season (considering the fact that Coffey was sent the other way, and that Gretzky had been traded) paid off in spades for the Oilers in '88 as well. His post season goal scoring prowess - of which those two seasons are the only such examples - played a major part.

And who said anything about "single-handedly" anything? Those two players specifically had the best seasons of their careers (from start to Cup) for the Oilers after Gretzky's departure, and they weren't marginal or "depth" players. And one of them did win the Conn Smythe and the other led the playoffs in scoring; single-handedly or not.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 05:55 PM
  #475
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Why Fedorov? I do not have to give you reasons. Please ask Gretzky, ask Scottie Bowman.

Here are the quotes:

Heaven on Ice: Ray Sheppard's Life in Hockey - page 228:

During the 1993–94 NHL season, being interviewed before his game, Gretzky was talking about a 17 December match between the Detroit Red Wings and New York Rangers, and said "he had never seen a player dominate the game the way Sergei did'".

Scottie Bowman said in 2009:

"I talked to Wayne Gretzky about that six or seven years ago and he said to me: 'I couldn't play forward and defence. Mario couldn't do it. Jagr couldn't play defense. But Sergei could. He was a hell of a player'."
I'm not really worried about whether I'm being rude or not, but if you throw out 100 names to Wayne Gretzky he'll say "He's the best ever" for each one.

Morgoth Bauglir 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 10:59 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.