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.

What Gretzky be as good in post lock-out era?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-10-2011, 07:29 PM
  #76
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
It's not just the NHL but scoring by elite players is down considerably in the 3 Major Jr leagues in Canada too. Players in Jr are asked to play a team game and the competition and defensive awareness is so much greater as well. this carries over to the NHL unless people want to argue that Canadians are less talented than in the 80's, which is not something I have heard anywhere.
I think over coaching, unrealistic parent expectations and especially a lack of unstructured play time for fun is one of the most important factors preventing another true generational talent from coming along.

Most of the outdoor rinks I know of are long gone. Many of the parks that got flooded are gone / winters are shorter now so there isn't as much time to use them. The suburbs that are popular now hardly have the room in the yards to make a little pad for your kid.

Honestly I think we're training that special genius right out of players coming up today, starting at the earliest levels.

It was already so rare to begin with that even if you stunt one kid every 10 years it is going to be a long time before we see another player like an Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux/Howe etc. And please no one start up on me with the Crosby is a generational talent thing.. he isn't. He might be the most talented player of his generation but that is it.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 07:30 PM
  #77
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lextune View Post
I never said you did. Just used him as an example. Hence the "(or any other 2nd or 3rd scrub) " line.


Never said you mentioned him specifically, (ala Mason Raymond). The Lafleur reference was from the famous History section "blinding flash of the obvious"



Anyone preaching how much better, faster, tougher, defensively sound, etc. the game is today, gets the "OMG! LaFleur couldn't play in the league today!!1!" quote.

It's a History section meme for newbies like yourself whose posts defy the most rudimentary hockey knowledge.

EXAMPLE:

You have a league where Crosby puts up 120 points, (I'm a well known Crosby fan), and then tell us that a prime Mario would only put up 140. Now you have Gretzky scoring barely over 100.

That is either idiocy or trolling. I was simply giving you the benefit of the doubt.


.
so let me get this right, you are still painting me with a brush that you paint everyone with because of my stating the obvious? I know it's the history section but to ignore the quality of play is ridiculous. why don't we promote some world championship C level superstar and call him the best player in the world because he dominates against the Chinese, Japanese and Polynesian national teams in world play. The reason we don't is because of context. context matters despite some dogma imposed by some in the history section.

You clearly jump the gun and jump to conclusions and are blinded by your prejudiced when reading posts such as mine or did you miss the numerous times that I have stated that WAYNE GREATEST IS THE BEST PLAYER OF ALL TIME.

Now just because I believe that tyo be true it doesn't paint me in a box when evaluating the NHL in post lockout conditions. to automatically transport past players dominance to today's conditions is just plain ridiculous.

guys like Orr and Gretzky didn't simply dominate on pure skill but because of their teams and the state of the NHL during their playing times as well.

There is a range of how good Wayne might be today as we have no idea on how he would be affected by the changes in the game. We can make educated guesses but its still just a guess. Maybe if you have a problem with my argument you can address it instead of painting me with some prejudicial brush that doesn't hold any water.

If you can't do that it only makes you look closed minded at best and a bully at worst. Perhaps you don't care but I'll stick to serious hockey discussions as i cannot control yours and R71's lack of manners.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 07:35 PM
  #78
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post

What would the scouting report be on a 6'0" 180lb center who is an offensive whiz but not responsibly defensively?

People's opinions are kinda clouded by our perceptions of what Wayne was during his time and people just can't or won't appreciate the differences in todays game.
See, yet another time where research would of helped you not put your foot in your mouth again.

If you had of looked up what the "hockey experts" and scouts were saying about Gretzky before he made it to the NHL, you would of discovered that very few thought he would even make it through one season. Comments and opinions ranging from he's for too puny to survive to his lack of defensive play will see him back in the minor in no time.

Funny how what they said then as to why Gretzky would never be that good are awfully similar to the reasons you're giving...amusing to say the least

What's that old saying...."Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it".
Seeing it first hand here folks


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 07-10-2011 at 07:46 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 07:40 PM
  #79
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
so let me get this right, you are still painting me with a brush that you paint everyone with because of my stating the obvious? I know it's the history section but to ignore the quality of play is ridiculous. why don't we promote some world championship C level superstar and call him the best player in the world because he dominates against the Chinese, Japanese and Polynesian national teams in world play. The reason we don't is because of context. context matters despite some dogma imposed by some in the history section.
Wait, wait wait...are you seriously equating Gretzky's dominance to some C level superstar playing against Asian national teams....wow, I think I'm gonna start calling you Casey Kasem, Casey for short, because the hits just keep on comin with you!

Oh and Casey, if by "some in the History section", you actually mean "most in the History section" they yeah I agree


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 07-10-2011 at 07:49 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 07:42 PM
  #80
Hammer Time
Registered User
 
Hammer Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,845
vCash: 500
It's often said that due to improved D and goaltending (no "Mickey Mouse organizations"), 200-point seasons aren't possible anymore ... I agree. But the Great One would still be a dominant player, in any era: it's just that the number of points you need to get to be "dominant" has changed.

If his linemates are Datsyuk and Zetterberg, he puts up 50G + 100 A (150 P) consistently. But in this salary cap era, he's more likely to be playing on a bad team, in which case 130-140 points sounds about right. Either way, he's still the best forward in the league by a wide margin.

Hammer Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 07:47 PM
  #81
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Popularity contest? You're the one that tried to imply that I'm the one with only a couple of people on my side with no credible backing. Simply pointing out that it's quite the opposite is not part of any popularity contest.



Hmmmmm...lets see...your very first post in this thread had Gretzky at a ceiling of only 100-140 points, followed by, and I quote:

"Honestly, I'm being generous to Wayne in that he scores 100-150 depending on the situation there is also a distinct possibility that he wouldn't reach those targets in each and every year in todays NHL."

Like you realise here that we're talking about Wayne in his prime and where he would rank today right?
I mean the whole point of this thread was to ask how his best hockey years would compare to today.
So you saying that during his best years, his ceiling could be as low as only 100 points and on top of that you add that he may not even make that every year.
Is there another way of reading that or are you now going to clarify that you mistakenly assumed we would be talking about him at 35 years old as well when clearly there was no reason to include those years?

Oh yeah, one more thing to add.
Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe his early peak and somewhat early decline compared to some players had something to do with starting to play actual professional hockey at age 17 instead of 18, 19, 20 or even 21 like most players today?
you are the one claiming everyone to be on your side as if it means anything and the specific point I was referring to was the Edmonton-LA example you brought up. Haven't heard anyone adding additional info on those thoughts.

as for your assumption that we are talking about Wayne's prime it's not in the title and I'll bring up the Florida 2011 example again with a specific type of coach. Ya I checked back the OP made no mention of Wayne's prime he was talking in general but I'll stick with his prime being 100-140 depending on team situation and of course there is a possibility that he could edge over both sides by a bit down to 90 and up to 160 in the best case scenario.

Looking back at games in the early 80's alot of those goals scored, by everyone, just simply wouldn't happen in the post lockout era and definitely not with as much regularity.

Teams defensive pushback and ability to stop over teams from scoring are considerably better for a variety of reasons than they were in the early 80's.

as for your last point, it's possible but Messier followed a similar track and played more physical and actual had his peak season at a alter age but it's not a huge sample size. Wayne seemed to be able to play alot of games even after his incredible superhuman peak at age 21-25 and was still a considerable player and the best offensive player in the league for most of his time in the NHL.

but as we have seen from earlier posts even the best player has variations in scoring prowess due to a variety of factors in his playing time.

To suggest that the additional factors of the changes from the early 80's or even early 90's to the post lockout era would not have affected him in some way is just getting way to nostalgic and treating Wayne like a god.

Even though he might be the player that was closet to being a god and immortal he was human and these things did and would have affected him IMO.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 08:01 PM
  #82
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
you are the one claiming everyone to be on your side as if it means anything and the specific point I was referring to was the Edmonton-LA example you brought up. Haven't heard anyone adding additional info on those thoughts.

as for your assumption that we are talking about Wayne's prime it's not in the title and I'll bring up the Florida 2011 example again with a specific type of coach. Ya I checked back the OP made no mention of Wayne's prime he was talking in general but I'll stick with his prime being 100-140 depending on team situation and of course there is a possibility that he could edge over both sides by a bit down to 90 and up to 160 in the best case scenario.

Looking back at games in the early 80's alot of those goals scored, by everyone, just simply wouldn't happen in the post lockout era and definitely not with as much regularity.

Teams defensive pushback and ability to stop over teams from scoring are considerably better for a variety of reasons than they were in the early 80's.

as for your last point, it's possible but Messier followed a similar track and played more physical and actual had his peak season at a alter age but it's not a huge sample size. Wayne seemed to be able to play alot of games even after his incredible superhuman peak at age 21-25 and was still a considerable player and the best offensive player in the league for most of his time in the NHL.

but as we have seen from earlier posts even the best player has variations in scoring prowess due to a variety of factors in his playing time.

To suggest that the additional factors of the changes from the early 80's or even early 90's to the post lockout era would not have affected him in some way is just getting way to nostalgic and treating Wayne like a god.

Even though he might be the player that was closet to being a god and immortal he was human and these things did and would have affected him IMO.

Look you want to keep on spouting off how the changes in the league were the main factors as to why Gretzky's production started to drop off. Fine but how about some documentation to go along with it???
Where are the cross sections of other players during those same years detailing how each and every one of them also suffered similar production decreases.
Come back with actual evidence and support to your theories and we can continue this, no problem. I promise if you start to act like an adult and argue points like one, I'll treat you like one.

(BTW, a proper cross section is not going through and picking out 10 or 15 players that only support your side either. Try taking the top 20 scorers from a year or two before Gretzky's ppg started to drop and detail them all over the next 5 years.
I've already browsed through them and know what you will find but it would mean so much more if you actually had the balls to produce that list here yourself.
Much more likely though that you try to completely forget I even mentioned this and do your best to ignore any future references to it.)

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 08:06 PM
  #83
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Wait, wait wait...are you seriously equating Gretzky's dominance to some C level superstar playing against Asian national teams....wow, I think I'm gonna start calling you Casey Kasem, Casey for short, because the hits just keep on comin with you!

Oh and Casey, if by "some in the History section", you actually mean "most in the History section" they yeah I agree
Once again maybe reading the actual post you might understand what I'm saying but instead feel free to jump to conclusions in your wild imagination and judge the poster and not the content.

You seem like a smart enough guy to grasp what I'm trying to say there so what exactly are your intentions here, to provide some substance or to act the part of the schoolyard bully?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 08:13 PM
  #84
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
See, yet another time where research would of helped you not put your foot in your mouth again.

If you had of looked up what the "hockey experts" and scouts were saying about Gretzky before he made it to the NHL, you would of discovered that very few thought he would even make it through one season. Comments and opinions ranging from he's for too puny to survive to his lack of defensive play will see him back in the minor in no time.

Funny how what they said then as to why Gretzky would never be that good are awfully similar to the reasons you're giving...amusing to say the least

What's that old saying...."Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it".
Seeing it first hand here folks
I'm fully aware of what scouts both in those days and today say and how they rate players. Everyone is perfect in hindsight.

Everyone knows that Kyle Turris and RNH both had to gain weight and strength to make full use of their skill levels in todays NHL. in hindsight Phoenix might have brought Turris up too quickly we don't know how Edmonton will treat RNH of how he will develop.

It was another point in the discussion but if we want to focus this discussion on prime (and it would depend when he came into the league as well in any sort of discussion) then we can adapt it but I'm more sure how serious you really are about all of this.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 08:23 PM
  #85
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Look you want to keep on spouting off how the changes in the league were the main factors as to why Gretzky's production started to drop off. Fine but how about some documentation to go along with it???
Where are the cross sections of other players during those same years detailing how each and every one of them also suffered similar production decreases.
Come back with actual evidence and support to your theories and we can continue this, no problem. I promise if you start to act like an adult and argue points like one, I'll treat you like one.

(BTW, a proper cross section is not going through and picking out 10 or 15 players that only support your side either. Try taking the top 20 scorers from a year or two before Gretzky's ppg started to drop and detail them all over the next 5 years.
I've already browsed through them and know what you will find but it would mean so much more if you actually had the balls to produce that list here yourself.
Much more likely though that you try to completely forget I even mentioned this and do your best to ignore any future references to it.)
Nice straw man you built there, look i already posted on how the other top 10 scoring forwards of all time did and when they peaked in their production, obviously it didn't back your position so you choose to ignore it.

Obviously every season is unique or otherwise we would see the same results year in and year out to expect everyone in the top 10 or 15 to have the same level of decrease or increase is absurd.

Let's deal with the example previously given before i waste a considerable amount of time. which i will probably do anyways in the future).

Any such project would no doubt lead to the conclusion that there are various factors in each and every players performance from season to season and if you think Wayne is exempt from that then you don't read your own posts.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 08:31 PM
  #86
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,233
vCash: 500
of course he'd be good in todays league

that said, his best play was in the pre-goaltending NHL when any idiot could take a weak shot on net and score

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 09:07 PM
  #87
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Nice straw man you built there, look i already posted on how the other top 10 scoring forwards of all time did and when they peaked in their production, obviously it didn't back your position so you choose to ignore it.

Obviously every season is unique or otherwise we would see the same results year in and year out to expect everyone in the top 10 or 15 to have the same level of decrease or increase is absurd.

Let's deal with the example previously given before i waste a considerable amount of time. which i will probably do anyways in the future).

Any such project would no doubt lead to the conclusion that there are various factors in each and every players performance from season to season and if you think Wayne is exempt from that then you don't read your own posts.

There's no straw man built here dude. You're just trying to skirt the subject now.

It's real simple. If, as you're saying, that Gretzky's production started to drop because of a changing league instead of the factors myself and others have given like losing Coffey, getting traded to the Kings and having a major back injury.
Then you should have no problem what so ever producing the numbers of other top scorers over the exact same time frame that show similar drops in production.
That's it dude, just prove your case, no strawman, no BS, just put your money where your mouth is.
I realise not all players will have the exact same decrease but if you take a big enough cross section and IF what you say is true, then there should be no reason why a pattern of similar peaks and valley's shouldn't form.



BTW, THE very first post asks how good would Gretzky be in today's NHL.
HOW GOOD would he be!!! That amply implies that we would be talking about what his peak years would be.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 07-10-2011 at 09:26 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 09:16 PM
  #88
Foot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 295
vCash: 500
Why do all the trolls come from Vancouver?

Foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 10:53 PM
  #89
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes I do think that he would make adjustments, my point is that teams are better equipped in so many ways to combat and defend the offensively skilled player today.

Also the hockey sense and level of commitment both internal and enforced by coaches to defensive systems and responsibilities would hamper even the great one IMO.

Every great player excels in part to the perfect storm situation of the team and context that they play in. Wayne from age 22-27 had every season with a 2.32 PPG average and in seasons aged 28-33 had seasons of
2.15
1.95
2.09
1.64
1.44
1.60

Did he get that much worse in those seasons which still should have been peak years for him or did his situation and the leagues change somewhat?

The latter is more likely IMO as this was the trend in the league overall.

I haven't done a close study on it but the quality and defensive awareness of players has increased with the increase in the number of players form Europe as well.

This in and off itself doesn't prove cause and affect but I think it plays a part in what makes it harder today for the more skilled players to dominate point wise than players in the past.

This difference, the level and commitment to defensive hockey has more to do with the lower scoring than any "perceived decrease in skill" of top flight talent.
Like Rhiessan71 said, the Suter crosscheck in the 1991 Canada Cup hurt him a lot. He was 30 years old at that time and despite people thinking the 1980s were his only dominant time this was the last season (1990-'91) where he dominated the NHL in points.

Keep in mind another thing, he was 30 years old. I know that isn't old by any means, but we forget just how much hockey Gretzky had played by then. He was rarely injured and he never said no to Canada Cups and he was always on deep playoff runs. That's a lot of hockey, it is not hard to see how it can catch up to a man once he hits his 30s.

But even with the wonky back he still won a scoring title in 1994. He led the playoffs in scoring in 1993. He still had 3 100 point seasons after 1991 and two more 90 point years. Not to mention he led the 1990s in points by a clear margin. The points drop from 1991 to 1992 was based on his lack of mobility from the Suter hit. His goal scoring prowess was never really the same and if you do a check on his stats you'll see he never cracked 40 again and 25-30 was his norm

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:00 PM
  #90
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I'm fully aware of what scouts both in those days and today say and how they rate players. Everyone is perfect in hindsight.

Everyone knows that Kyle Turris and RNH both had to gain weight and strength to make full use of their skill levels in todays NHL. in hindsight Phoenix might have brought Turris up too quickly we don't know how Edmonton will treat RNH of how he will develop.

It was another point in the discussion but if we want to focus this discussion on prime (and it would depend when he came into the league as well in any sort of discussion) then we can adapt it but I'm more sure how serious you really are about all of this.
Except Turris and Nugent-Hopkins are not Gretzky. I know it was a lousy choice by Team Canada but Nugent-Hopkins didn't crack the WJC team. Can you imagine Gretzky not cracking the 1979 WJC? We all know what he did in 1978.

There are many smart players in today's NHL who know how to avoid big hits but still be successful. St. Louis is a perfect example. Yet neither of them are as smart as Gretzky was at all aspects of the game. He would be a step ahead of everyone, even today.

It's funny, because we all know how Gretzky killed the 1980s. But people forget he led the 1990s in points too. How can we even suggest that a guy who led two decades in scoring (and there were some changes from the 1980s to 1990s) would have a hard time adjusting in today's game? We saw him outscore a prime Selanne and tie Bure for points while only trailing Forsberg by one point in 1997-'98. Gretzky was in his second to last season and he turned 37 that year. This was the height of the clutch and grab era with the idiot crease rule (thank you Brian Burke). And he still gets 90 points. It is foolish to suggest he wouldn't dominate

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:02 PM
  #91
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I brought up the 200 points because Wayne averaged that in his 6 year peak from 82-86 and the OP asked if Wayne would be as good.
He wouldn't have to hit 200 points to be "as good". In today's lower-scoring environment, each point he scores would be more valuable than each point he scored in the early 80s.


Last edited by Iain Fyffe: 07-10-2011 at 11:31 PM.
Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:17 PM
  #92
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
 
SmellOfVictory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,772
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
And please no one start up on me with the Crosby is a generational talent thing.. he isn't. He might be the most talented player of his generation but that is it.
You just said he's not generational and followed it by describing him as the exact definition of the word.

As to the OP: he'd probably be less productive. He might still dominate the league and would likely put up significantly more points than anyone else, but I doubt he'd crack 200. He was playing against some absolutely atrocious teams for a lot of those years; worse than any teams that exist now.

SmellOfVictory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:34 PM
  #93
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
You just said he's not generational and followed it by describing him as the exact definition of the word.
Glad you have your dictionary handy but for at least some of us around here:

generational = a talent so rare that you might see it roughly once a generation on average. ie. Howe/Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux over the last 65+ years post war.

Sometimes, just by chance, you get two in overlapping like Gretzky and Lemieux, sometimes the league doesn't have one at all. (like now, in my opinion)

Crosby is not at that that kind of level, but he is probably the best player of the current crop.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2011, 11:46 PM
  #94
Hanji
Registered User
 
Hanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Glad you have your dictionary handy but for at least some of us around here:

generational = a talent so rare that you might see it roughly once a generation on average. ie. Howe/Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux over the last 65+ years post war.

Sometimes, just by chance, you get two in overlapping like Gretzky and Lemieux, sometimes the league doesn't have one at all. (like now, in my opinion)

Crosby is not at that that kind of level, but he is probably the best player of the current crop.
Lidstrom?

Hanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 12:04 AM
  #95
Trebek
Mod Supervisor
 
Trebek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
Lidstrom?
I wouldn't call Lidstrom generational - he certainly had longevity, but at any given moment in his career, he had comparable peers.

Trebek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 12:27 AM
  #96
McNuts
Registered User
 
McNuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,827
vCash: 500
He would be a frequent Art Ross winner and the best player in the league, but I don't think he would be as dominant as he was in the 1980's. He'd win it by maybe 20% instead of 50+%.

And I also think he would get over 100 assists several times, but he wouldn't win the Richard.

McNuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 12:28 AM
  #97
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
There's no straw man built here dude. You're just trying to skirt the subject now.

It's real simple. If, as you're saying, that Gretzky's production started to drop because of a changing league instead of the factors myself and others have given like losing Coffey, getting traded to the Kings and having a major back injury.
Then you should have no problem what so ever producing the numbers of other top scorers over the exact same time frame that show similar drops in production.
That's it dude, just prove your case, no strawman, no BS, just put your money where your mouth is.
I realise not all players will have the exact same decrease but if you take a big enough cross section and IF what you say is true, then there should be no reason why a pattern of similar peaks and valley's shouldn't form.



BTW, THE very first post asks how good would Gretzky be in today's NHL.
HOW GOOD would he be!!! That amply implies that we would be talking about what his peak years would be.
look, you really have to learn how to read back in my 1st post here on the topic, I talked about both the team situation he would be going to as well as the situation of the league as a whole.

After I produced the PPG listing, you took it upon yourself to make my argument different than what was presented all along. I never said it was one factor and you even agreed with the Coffey injury being injured and playing on a different team affected even the Great one's totals.

http://hockeyanalytics.com/2009/02/the-eras-of-the-nhl/

You might want to read this, its tells some interesting stuff.

Pay particualr attention to the era called the goaltendign years 87-07.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 12:35 AM
  #98
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
He wouldn't have to hit 200 points to be "as good". In today's lower-scoring environment, each point he scores would be more valuable than each point he scored in the early 80s.
I understand that point as I believe adjusted stats are more informative when comparing players statistically from different seasons, not a perfect stat but better than actual raw stats.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 12:49 AM
  #99
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
Hardyvan123, i love it how you try and diminish orr's accomplishments due to the state of the league.

In orr's final season, he won the norris, art ross and pearson. These were the following players at each position.

Forward: Phil Esposito, Guy Lafluer, Bobby Clarke, Marcel Dionne, Gilbert Perrault, Jean Ratelle, Stan Mikita, Rod Gilbert, Rick Martin, Jacques Lemaire, Darryl Sittler

Defenseman: Orr, Potvin, Salming, Park, Lapointe, Savard, Robinson

Goalie: Parent, Vachon, Tony Espo, Dryden, Billy Smith

Let's see you actually name the best players from each position last season, you wont because you know how much they pale in comparison.

Yeah Orr wont be able to dominate a league where defenseman cant even score 60 points without takings risks and diminshing their defensive play.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2011, 01:25 AM
  #100
shazariahl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Fair enough, Gretzky was a great forechecker and used his strengths to contribute in areas other than the offensive zone as well. I realize he wasn't some floater who didn't recognize the need to play good team defense when it was required. My real point was that he didn't go into the corners and "dirty areas" as much as someone like Crosby. People would hold this against him if he and Crosby were close in terms of offensive numbers.
Thanks. And you are correct too - Crosby is a much "grittier" player than Gretzky ever was. Both have a ton of heart. That's one of the reasons I decided not to make definitive statments about which was better defensively. Gretzky played a different type of defense - one often overlooked because it was very untraditional. Doesn't mean it was bad. Crosby plays a more conventional defense. But there's nothing wrong with that either.

shazariahl 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 08:32 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.