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

Holy crap! (re: Gretzky)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-10-2007, 11:36 AM
  #101
asdf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country:
Posts: 2,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCD View Post
For the sake of argument, lets say that is true.

Guess what? Wayne still finishes with more scoring titles.
Guess what? As I already stated, Gretzky had nobody to compete with for the first 5 or so seasons. Lemieux had to compete with Gretzky as soon as he started in the NHL.


Quote:
Funny. A Mario fanboy accusing other people of denying facts.

Yes, Wayne did already have 10 trophies before Mario joined. He notched another 21 afterwards.
Funny, anybody that challenges the great Gretzky is a Mario fanboy. Yes, Gretzky did have 10 awards before Lemieux arrived. He had more than 10. I don't know what type of semantics argument you're trying to make but the irony of you accusing others of denying facts is astounding.

Quote:
This is smply pathetic. You guys concoct these elborate what-if scenarios, accusing Wayne of putting on a humble act for 40-some years, ignore facts and then claim that the other side of the debate doesn't have a rebuttal.

Well, it is your fantasy. Live it up.
Sorry, what's pathetic is you just dismissing everything when you don't have an argument. There are no elaborate what-if scenarios. What-ifs are reserved for guys like Lindros. Lemieux dominated every time he stepped on the ice, just like Orr, and just like Gretzky. The only what-if is what would have been if they would have had lengthier careers. The elaborate what-ifs are construed by "Gretzky fanboys" like you who just cover their ears, say "if but could should would," and throw out lame platitudes involved aunts, uncles, and balls.

asdf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 11:37 AM
  #102
JCD
Registered User
 
JCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country:
Posts: 14,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector View Post
Cup Sens kinda mentioned that. What he's saying was that no matter what his motivations, Lemieux saved a franchise and not even Gretzky can claim that.
No, Gretzky didn't have to buy a team out of bankruptcy with IOUs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
#2 confuses me. What do you mean by that?
There are hundreds of people employed by the Penguins. Thousands of fans paid for tckets to see a professional hockey team. The Penguins are a business, well supposed too. Owners are not supposed to treat their companies like their own personal playground. The Penguins are supposed to compete in the NHL, they are not suppose to serve as Mario's personal trainer to get him ready for the Olympics.

It would be like an owner cancelling a game so his son's peewee team could use the rink. Well, that would actually be better in some respects. The owner wouldn't be acting like he is trying to put the best possible product on the ice.

What Mario did was selfish. Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
#3 is something that has to be considered from two different perspectives. From a Canadian standpoint it was seen as an incredibly patriotic act, sacrificing his company and health to bring a gold medal back. You already pointed out the Pittsburgh perspective.
Thing is, you Canadians were not buying the tickets in order to pay for Mario's training program. Nor was Mario asking for your tax dollars to build him a new rink.

Sorry, what he did wasn't patriotic. It was patronizing and selfish. The patriotic thing to do would be to not play in the NHL that year and focus on getting ready for the Olympics. What he did was trick the fans into paying for his training program, then quitting on the season once he got what he wanted.

JCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 11:43 AM
  #103
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisent View Post
I have the greatest respect for Gretzy´s accomplishments. But I take Pele.
You have to consider that he was likely the most fouled player ever as players were not santioned with red or yellow cards when they foul until 1970.

I just remember him on the tail end, with the Cosmos.

To think that soccer at one time sold out (or came close to selling out) the Meadowlands, fairly reguarly.

Pele, Gretzky...undeniable sports icons. And those type you can count on one hand.

Trottier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 11:44 AM
  #104
JCD
Registered User
 
JCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country:
Posts: 14,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
There's so much hyperbole being thrown around, calling what he did grotesquely selfish or the most selfish thing they have ever seen. He was injured and he represented his country in a last ditch effort of sorts. If he didn't do that he still would have sat out due to injury.
Obvious you are neither American nor live in Pittsburgh.

The fans paid thousands of dollars on tickets to see Mario play. Mario took the money, then did what he wanted to. Rather than play for the fans paying his salary, he played for his country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
As far as the bankruptcy issues go, he was owed money. If he really only cared about the money over saving the franchise, he could have washed his hands of the whole thing a long time ago. He could have went to the highest bidder and played for probably $10 million a season or so. He would have saved himself a ton of headache.
You are also young I see. Nobody washes their hands of millions in back salary. When you start having to pay your own bills, you will understand.

Mario DIDN'T want to play out of the kindness out his heart. He was lured out of retirement to save his investment. You really think that if Mario wasn't owed money, he would have still come back?

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
He gets called selfish for saving a franchise (on more than one occasion) and he gets called selfish for representing his country. Nice.
No. He gets called selfish when he acts selfishly.

JCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 11:53 AM
  #105
JCD
Registered User
 
JCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country:
Posts: 14,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
Guess what? As I already stated, Gretzky had nobody to compete with for the first 5 or so seasons. Lemieux had to compete with Gretzky as soon as he started in the NHL.
Must be young and new to hockey. Try to have at least a passing understanding of the history of the game.

Go to the Hockey Hall of Fame and look up Dionne, LaFleur, Bossy, Statsny and Trottier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
Funny, anybody that challenges the great Gretzky is a Mario fanboy. Yes, Gretzky did have 10 awards before Lemieux arrived. He had more than 10. I don't know what type of semantics argument you're trying to make but the irony of you accusing others of denying facts is astounding.
The claim was made that Wayne won most of his awards before Mario even joined the league. That is denying facts.

If you are going to be part of this discussion please try to keep up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdf View Post
Sorry, what's pathetic is you just dismissing everything when you don't have an argument. There are no elaborate what-if scenarios. What-ifs are reserved for guys like Lindros. Lemieux dominated every time he stepped on the ice, just like Orr, and just like Gretzky. The only what-if is what would have been if they would have had lengthier careers. The elaborate what-ifs are construed by "Gretzky fanboys" like you who just cover their ears, say "if but could should would," and throw out lame platitudes involved aunts, uncles, and balls.
That "what if" scenarios are construed by Gretzky fanboys?

Sorry, if I would have known you were "special" earlier, I wouldn't have come down as hard. I apologize for being so harsh, but I won't waste any more time on your nonsense.

JCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 12:32 PM
  #106
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier View Post
I just remember him on the tail end, with the Cosmos.

To think that soccer at one time sold out (or came close to selling out) the Meadowlands, fairly reguarly.

Pele, Gretzky...undeniable sports icons. And those type you can count on one hand.
Ali, Ruth.... Who else?

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 12:37 PM
  #107
cbj21
Registered User
 
cbj21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Shampoo land
Country: Norway
Posts: 2,533
vCash: 500
Just to add to the fire that Gretzky was "the untouchable" while Mario was not.
That said this thread has not changed my mind that Gretzky was and still is #1.
So if Gretzky is Pele, Mario is Maradona.
And I love them all.

cbj21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 12:52 PM
  #108
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbj21 View Post
So if Gretzky is Pele, Mario is Maradona.
Mario isn't THAT FAT these days.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 02:59 PM
  #109
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
Ali, Ruth.... Who else?
For me just about ends there, though I'd add that guy, #23, who played for those Bulls teams of not too long ago. Cut through all the crap of modern day sports marketing "celebrity" and you'd be hard-pressed to identify a more determined and dominating competitor on any sports surface over the last several decades. Was the ultimate example of translating individual greatness into team success, IMO.

So, we've left out anyone from football, tennis and golf, among more notable sports. That's OK, I guess - if you have to think about a name, they do not belong in that most rarified air, IMO.

Trottier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 03:10 PM
  #110
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
Ali, Ruth.... Who else?
Ali might be an icon but he was not the dominant force that Ruth, Gretzky and Jordan were. To be a three time champion means you have to lose the championship at least twice, no?

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 03:38 PM
  #111
Master_Of_Districts
Registered User
 
Master_Of_Districts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Black Ruthenia
Country: Belarus
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Really? You mean it would be impossible for him to say... post only 122 points in 76 games? Like he did only 2 years later?
1. Look up the average goals per game in the NHL in 1993-94.
2. Look up the average goals per game in the NHL in 1996-97.
3. Correct your argument accordingly.

Master_Of_Districts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 03:53 PM
  #112
The Thomas J.*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 18,847
vCash: 500
Lemuiex was truly an amazing player, he was able to accomplished things after taking so much time off is just amazing, If Lemuiex did not develop the heart prolbem he would still be playing @ a high level. Gretzky only had @ best 2 really good more years in him, & that only would have been if the Rangers themselves were good.

The Thomas J.* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 04:19 PM
  #113
asdf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country:
Posts: 2,038
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=JCD;11146352]Obvious you are neither American nor live in Pittsburgh.

The fans paid thousands of dollars on tickets to see Mario play. Mario took the money, then did what he wanted to. Rather than play for the fans paying his salary, he played for his country.[quote]

Way to make assumptions. Mario didn't just take the money and then decide he'd rather go on vacations. He had a pretty serious injury and would have sat out whether or not he played in the Olympics.

But I guess by your standards Lemieux is not allowed to be injured and must continue playing, otherwise he'll be swindling the fans.



Quote:
You are also young I see. Nobody washes their hands of millions in back salary. When you start having to pay your own bills, you will understand.

Mario DIDN'T want to play out of the kindness out his heart. He was lured out of retirement to save his investment. You really think that if Mario wasn't owed money, he would have still come back?
Wow, more assumptions and a personal attack on top of that. How professional. First you criticize him for trying to get his money back, and now you say that nobody washes their hands of millions in back salary. Make up your mind.

He didn't have to do everything he did to get the franchise to where it's at now. He could have just played for one of the wealthier teams in the league and made a ton of money instead of going through all of the crap he did.

How many players play out of the kindness of their heart? Your precious Gretzky didn't play for free. I guess that makes him selfish too.


Quote:
No. He gets called selfish when he acts selfishly.
Well then pretty much every athlete is selfish.

asdf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 04:43 PM
  #114
asdf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country:
Posts: 2,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCD View Post
Must be young and new to hockey. Try to have at least a passing understanding of the history of the game.
Go to the Hockey Hall of Fame and look up Dionne, LaFleur, Bossy, Statsny and Trottier.
Quote:

Assumptions that I'm young and new to hockey...where have I heard that before? Since you're not understanding or purposely interpreting my comment whatever way works for you, I'll try and explain it again. Gretzky didn't have anybody comparable to him to compete with him. Lemieux did...Gretzky. Are you understanding now or would you like it explained further?
The claim was made that Wayne won most of his awards before Mario even joined the league. That is denying facts.

If you are going to be part of this discussion please try to keep up.
[quote]

No that wasn't the claim, but twisting words is nothing new for you. I said that a good chunk were won before Lemieux was in the league, and almost half is a good chunk. If you include those won when Lemieux was a rookie or in his 2nd year, the number is even greater. Please try to keep up.

Quote:
That "what if" scenarios are construed by Gretzky fanboys?

Sorry, if I would have known you were "special" earlier, I wouldn't have come down as hard. I apologize for being so harsh, but I won't waste any more time on your nonsense.
Just like anybody that makes an argument is a "Mario fanboy" according to you. Funny that you accuse me of thinking I'm special when you're the one being patronizing to anybody that's makes an argument.

asdf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2007, 05:25 PM
  #115
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Ali might be an icon but he was not the dominant force that Ruth, Gretzky and Jordan were. To be a three time champion means you have to lose the championship at least twice, no?
I think Ali was that dominant. He fought every big fighter of his long long career. He was outstanding. Sure he lost..... and he fought the guys he lost to and beat them.

Gretzky doesn't have 20 Stanley Cups he has 4. Even Michael Jordan didn't win every year.

Even if Ali was not the greatest boxer ever he beyond a doubt is the most iconic athlete of modern history. Part of it was hype but hype is a part of boxing.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2007, 11:31 PM
  #116
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
Really? He is Canadian.... he played in the Olympics.... at that time he OWNED THE FREAKING PENGUNS and had saved them from bankruptcy. Mario could do any freaking thing he wanted.... even an American Pens fan would be hard pressed to say Mario screwed the Pens on this.

How is it SELFISH to play for your country at the possible expense of the franchise YOU OWN? Seems the exact opposite to me.
he was also an employee to the franchise and its supposed on ice leader. He was a joke of an on ice leader after his return. This cannot be disputed.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2007, 11:38 PM
  #117
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
he was also an employee to the franchise and its supposed on ice leader. He was a joke of an on ice leader after his return. This cannot be disputed.
I'll dispute it. Mario could do what he wanted.... he owned the team. He was the greatest active player by a wide, wide margin. If he was screwing the Pens he was screwing himself...... what would be the walk up attendence in the games Mario missed vs those he played in? Mario was a hockey player and an owner. He had a duty to not just the Pens but to ALL hockey fans - to promote the game as an owner. Millions of people wanted to see him play in a best on best Olympic situation. He gave those millions what they wanted.

I'll say I am not rich. I specifically chose to pay for tickets for 3 games to see Ottawa play the Pens just so I could see Mario play since his un-retirement. He played in none of those 3 games. Was I pissed off? No. Do I blame Mario in any way? No. Am I disappointed I never got to see Mario live? Yes.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 12:28 AM
  #118
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
I'll dispute it. Mario could do what he wanted.... he owned the team. He was the greatest active player by a wide, wide margin. If he was screwing the Pens he was screwing himself...... what would be the walk up attendence in the games Mario missed vs those he played in? Mario was a hockey player and an owner. He had a duty to not just the Pens but to ALL hockey fans - to promote the game as an owner. Millions of people wanted to see him play in a best on best Olympic situation. He gave those millions what they wanted.

I'll say I am not rich. I specifically chose to pay for tickets for 3 games to see Ottawa play the Pens just so I could see Mario play since his un-retirement. He played in none of those 3 games. Was I pissed off? No. Do I blame Mario in any way? No. Am I disappointed I never got to see Mario live? Yes.
As the captain of his team, he failed. Bottom line.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 12:30 AM
  #119
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
As the captain of his team, he failed. Bottom line.
Bottom line.... if Mario had not come back and into the ownership fold the Penguins would no longer be playing in Pittsburgh. That cuts Mario a whole lot of slack in the Pittsburgh market I would hope.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 12:44 AM
  #120
Stonefly
Registered User
 
Stonefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
But the context is that you are by far the best player on a very strong team. You are responsible if said team does not win the Cup or if they do. Gretzky, Orr, Mario are not Henri Richard or Yvon Cournyer, or Ron Francis or a young Jagr or Kurri or Anderson or Gilles or Nystrom. They are the straw that stirs the drink, the leaders, the best players ever to lace on skates.

The fact is Gretzky has 4 Cups and Orr and Mario have 2. All were on great teams. The early 70's Bruins were the best team in the NHL for as long as the Gretzky Oilers were but they won only 2 Cups. Sure they faced the Habs and Flyers but Gretzky faced an Islander Dynasty and tremendously deep and strong Flames team. The Pens did not face that kind of opposition but really weren't as good as long as the Bruins or Oilers but they were very, very good and they had Mario AND Jagr.

Few NHL players can be said to be so responsible for team playoff success or lack of success. After all this isn't the NBA. But Roy has 2 Cups he was instrumental in earning. Gretzky has 4. Clarke has 2, Orr 2, Mario 2. No other players in the post expansion NHL were so singularly instrumentla in multiple Cups. The Isles Cups were about Trottier, Bossy and Potvin. The 70's Habs were about Dryden and LaFleur and others. The Wings Cups weren't just on Yzerman nor the Avs on just Sakic.

I guess I will get trashed for this post. But I am saying Gretzky was a top playoff performer. He never failed to show up. He was the best player in the world and he played like it in every single playoff game or internernational game he played in his prime or even after his prime.
I'm not going to trash you. It's an excellent post. I just happen to disagree a bit.
There are a myriad of reasons why Gretzky won 4 and Orr and Lemieux won 2. To say it was because they just weren't as good at winning is just not right.
There are just some things that are beyond one person's control. For example, is it Orr's fault that the Bruins could not score on the wall that was Bernie Parent? Parent was unbelievable during those playoffs and basically stole the cup from the Bruins. But for Parent the Bruins had the Flyers beat.
Let's also not discount the pain that both Orr and Lemieux often played through. It has an effect.

Orr was second in team scoring for one cup and tied for first for the other cup. He was the Conn Smythe winner both times and scored both cup winning goals while playing defence? I'm not sure how much more you could ask from a guy.

Stonefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 01:21 AM
  #121
WarriorOfGandhi
Was saying Boo-urns
 
WarriorOfGandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2008 Sens Rule View Post
Ali, Ruth.... Who else?
Montana certainly deserves a mention...although their careers aren't over, it looks like Tiger and Federer are going to be thought of as the icon of their respective sports.

WarriorOfGandhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 01:25 AM
  #122
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by willus3 View Post
I'm not going to trash you. It's an excellent post. I just happen to disagree a bit.
There are a myriad of reasons why Gretzky won 4 and Orr and Lemieux won 2. To say it was because they just weren't as good at winning is just not right.
There are just some things that are beyond one person's control. For example, is it Orr's fault that the Bruins could not score on the wall that was Bernie Parent? Parent was unbelievable during those playoffs and basically stole the cup from the Bruins. But for Parent the Bruins had the Flyers beat.
Let's also not discount the pain that both Orr and Lemieux often played through. It has an effect.

Orr was second in team scoring for one cup and tied for first for the other cup. He was the Conn Smythe winner both times and scored both cup winning goals while playing defence? I'm not sure how much more you could ask from a guy.
I in no way meant to demean Mario or Orr. They were both huge winner's and great clutch players. But if you want to look back and debate how many regular season points Mario might have scored if he had not had injuries and played more and project partial seasons to full ones you miss the point. Cups are what matter. Playoff success even if you don't win the Cup matters more than regular season point totals.

Mario was not in the same position as Gretzky and Orr in terms of the team around him. they were good but not for quite as long. But Orr and Gretzky are very similar in the teams that they played on. The Bruins were good enough to be a dynasty. They were that talented, they were that deep, they were that good. 2 Cups is huge, a great accomplishment. There are many great teams that never won 1 Cup let alone 2. But those "Big Bad Bruins" could only win 2 Cups and they had a similar length of dominance with Orr as the premiere player in the NHL as Gretzky did on the Oilers. The Islander Dynasty was beaten by the Gretzky Oilers and a very strong Flyers team twice and the pretty good Bruins once. They lost to the Isles Dynasty and a very, very deep and good Flames team that was to win the Cup the year after Wayne left the Oilers.

The Gretzky Oilers were not facing weak teams to win the Cup.

The fact is few players in the NHL can be said to be responsible for a team winning the Cup. It is truly a team game. But a very few are so good they are at a level that the measure of Cups won or not won can to a degree be put on their shoulders. Howe, Rocket Richard, Bobby Hull, Jean Beliveau, Phil Esposito and Bobby Orr (together), Roy, Mario, Gretzky. They were that good at their best and with a good supporting cast can be responsible to a significant degree for their teams playoff success. Hull comes up short. Howe, Richard, Beliveau, Gretzky and Roy stand out as great and Orr, Espo and Mario won what they should have maybe but not as many as they possibly could have. Just my opinion.

In the playoffs it is not possible to say what Mario could have and would have done. Gretzky's stats (even on non-cup winning teams) speak for his greatness being higher than Mario's. Gretzky is a lot closer to Mario in the regular season then they are in the playoffs. Gretzky scored 20 points or more NINE times. Mario did it THREE times. Gretzky only won 2 Conn Smythe trophies but he could very easily have won 6 of them. 2 on losing teams.

Gretzky was 1st in playoff scoring 6 times, 3rd once, 5th once, 6th once, 7th once. Mario was 1st twice, 2nd once, 7th once, 8th once, 9th once.

If people want to keep bringing up what could have been regarding regular seasons then let's bring up the playoffs and what actually was. Gretzky had one season he wasn't over a PPG in the playoffs in his career. His rookie year he got 3 points in 3 games. After that he scored well over a PPG even after he was past his prime. Gretzky holds almost every single regular season record career and single season. He was even better than that EVERY SINGLE PLAYOFFS he played. He was a playoff monster. Want to see Gretzky's best hockey? Watch the playoffs, watch the Canada Cup.

I in no means want to diminish Mario in any way. He was awesome, he was a winner, he was the second best player I ever saw play in my life. Gretzky was the best.


Last edited by Sens Rule: 11-12-2007 at 01:40 AM.
Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 01:29 AM
  #123
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorOfGandhi View Post
Montana certainly deserves a mention...although their careers aren't over, it looks like Tiger and Federer are going to be thought of as the icon of their respective sports.
Federer... people talk about him alot but is he iconic? I don't think so. In tennis crazily the player I think of is McEnroe as iconic but he definately wasn't the best ever but the iconic tennis player to a great many... or perhaps Conners. If I want to think of the best tennis player it is a Navratilova.... a chick... i can't get off that. Pound for pound taking each gender as equal she is likely the best Tennis player to ever play IMO. For Golf.... apologies to Tiger it is still Jack Nicklaus. I may not be old enough to remember him at his best but I watched the 1986 Masters. I golfed back then and I wasn't that old then and I don't golf now but I knew all about Nicklaus history and in 1986 I saw the greatness. Tiger is close though to matching Nicklaus. Palmer was for some reason more iconic and popular than Jack. But as to iconic I'll always remember a 46 year old Jack Nickalaus besting everyone in the 1986 Masters.

Montana... iconic? moreso than Elway, Marino or Rice or even Payton. But he isn't Jim Brown. If I picked an iconic football player it would be Jim Brown.... or better yet Thorpe as the iconic athlete and footballer of the last half century.


Last edited by Sens Rule: 11-12-2007 at 01:47 AM.
Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 01:29 AM
  #124
mpm26
 
mpm26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
As the captain of his team, he failed. Bottom line.
You clearly have no idea what mario lemieux meant to the Pittsburgh Penguins.

mpm26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2007, 01:34 AM
  #125
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,436
vCash: 500
For iconic athletes of the last 100 years I have seven.....

In order of time:

1) Jim Thorpe
2) Babe Ruth
3) Jesse Owens
4) Ali
5) Pele
6) Gretzky
7) Jordan

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:26 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.