Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,215
I prefer to post this on the HoH board because I think there's less of a chance the, "Gretzky would score maybe 60 points today" crowd will show up.
Not only do I think that the idea of the ongoing significant evolution of the NHL is exaggerated (at least when applied to elite talent), I think it's fairly irrelevant when it comes to discussions such as this one.
First of all, I think greatness can really only be measured by transcendence. I've read a lot of Nietzsche's works and I think he was on the right track with his theory of the Ubermensh (or "Overman").
A human who is truly great is one who overcomes the apparent barriers, limitations and restrictions of his time, towering above his contemporaries and establishing a lofty standard of greatness.
The greatest is not necessarily the one who has the most modern education, training, equipment or technology; such a person may be more evolved than a previous great, but merely being in a position to benefit from such advantages does not make one great. The greatest is the one who catapults the furthest above his contemporaries, establishing news standards of excellence and inspiring and driving forth further evolution.
In hockey, the man who has transcendent the forward position more than any other is Wayne Gretzky.
During his first eight years in the NHL - his peak - he consistently blew away his competitors in the scoring race and seized award after award, breaking records and winning Championships along the way...
He slowed down somewhat after year eight but was still extremely transcendent compared to everyone but Mario Lemieux.
After a dozen years, he began appearing more human but still won a scoring Title in 1994 and finished in the top five for points in 1997 and 1998.
The greatest player of the current generation of NHL'ers has consistently been among the very best of his time but has not dominated the scoring race the way Gretzky did.
After twelve years, he is well behind Gretzky in terms of in-season scoring dominance against the field...
Some have speculated that Crosby can continue playing at a very high level for several more seasons - if not for the majority of the remainder of his career...
The question is: If his last eight seasons are superior to Gretzky's, can he be placed higher on a list of all-time greats even if he never reaches Gretzky's peak level of dominance or transcendence?
Realistically, he is not going to be outscoring Connor McDavid or other young superstars in his mid 30s, but if he can continue finishing in the top three to five in the scoring race year after year while being a strong two-way presence and a difference-maker in the playoffs, can he negate the gap that exists between him and Gretzky after twelve seasons in the NHL?
Would winning two or three more scoring Titles and coming close to leading the League in points a few times while finishing high in the Selke-race multiple times be enough to move him close to Gretzky after 16 seasons to 18 seasons?
I don't think he can truly surpass Gretzky without coming closer to matching his dominance of the rest of the field in the scoring race than he has done thus far (even including 2014).
With a young Connor McDavid now a rival, this task seems implausible.
Gretzky's margins of victory in the NHL race:
1981: 29 points
1982: 65 points
1983: 62 points
1984: 79 points
1985: 73 points
1986: 74 points
1987: 75 points
1991: 32 points
Son..... Ive let this unwind for 14 tortuous pages.... indulged your intellectual curiosity and y'know what?.... LOSER..... Knew it about 5 words into your opening gambit. So............ Do I start a Poll? Do we CLOSE this lame assed thread or continue to entertain such nonsense that not only denigrates Wayne Gretzky but so too slanders & disrespects Sydney in setting a bar for the Lad that no one, NO ONE can clear?...