How many points would Wayne Gretzky and/or Mario Lemieux score in today's NHL?

[daver]

Well...........

1981 Oilers:
Gretzky - 164 points
Kurri - 75
Messier - 63
Callighen - 60
Anderson - 53

You get the point. This was a 19 year old Gretzky on a team that was well below .500 and he shattered the NHL record book this year by claiming the single season assist and points record. He outpointed a prime Marcel Dionne by 29 points and truth be told he hadn't even taken off to superman level yet.

I think he'd be fine.

Yeah, he would win art rosses by that type of margin, not 60-70 points.

So you think Wayne peaked at 164 points as a 20 year old and his 200 plus point seasons were a product of linemates. You do know he scored almost 40 more goals in 1982 right? Don't you think that would have boosted the point totals of his teammates not the other way around.

 

[canucks4ever]

So you think Wayne peaked at 164 points as a 20 year old and his 200 plus point seasons were a product of linemates. You do know he scored almost 40 more goals in 1982 right? Don't you think that would have boosted the point totals of his teammates not the other way around.

Maybe he started scoring even more because the goals per game went up and his teammates got better. Are you trying to say Messier, Kurri and Coffey don't develop into stars without Gretzky. Once Coffey started getting injured and then eventually traded, Gretzky's ppg dropped from 2.65 to 2.33. Then Gretzky gets traded to LA and his ppg pace drops again from 2.33 to 2.15. So yeah his production is relevant to linemates.


Do you really think if Gretzky was still on the Edmonton Oilers in 1989 and 1990, he doesnt score 10-20 more points. I can essentially guarantee he does.

In 1981, The Edmonton Oilers had 74 points. Next year they finish the season with 111 points. Do you think this rapid improvement was solely based on him taking it to another level. No, common sense says the team as a whole improved significantly.

 

[The Panther]

Are you trying to say Messier, Kurri and Coffey don't develop into stars without Gretzky.

I can't speak for another poster, but I actually think this is quite possible. Kurri said he planned to play only 1 year in the NHL, and then go home to Finland. If had gone to a non-Gretzky team in 1980-81, I think he might have just left. Several Edmonton players attributed their success to Wayne's influence on the team. Messier in particular benefited because he got 9 seasons without any pressure to carry the team, before he had to step-up and become the go-to guy on two franchises for about 10 years. No way he could have done that if he'd been the #1 center from 1980 forward.

They were all great players with or without Gretzky, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Wayne's influence on them was enormous.

Once Coffey started getting injured and then eventually traded, Gretzky's ppg dropped from 2.65 to 2.33.

That's not true. Wayne had 2.32 PPG in 1986-87, and Coffey played 75% of the games with Gretzky. (Wayne then had a 7-point game in the playoffs with Coffey injured.) Then, in 1987-88, Wayne had 2.33 PPG without Coffey at all.

Then Gretzky gets traded to LA and his ppg pace drops again from 2.33 to 2.15. So yeah his production is relevant to linemates.

Not really. His production is more relevant to the success of his team, as I've argued elsewhere (the two factors are certainly related, but not equal).

Gretzky jumped from 137 points to 164 points not because his team improved by 5 points and scored 21 more goals than the year before (presumably), but because he was maturing and getting closer to his physical peak. But when he jumps from 164 points to 212, is it because (a) the Oilers scored 89 more goals, (b) the team improved 37 points in the standings, or (c) Gretzky just kept getting better? And don't points (a) and (b) mutually reinforce one another? In truth, it's a confluence of all these factors.

Do you really think if Gretzky was still on the Edmonton Oilers in 1989 and 1990, he doesnt score 10-20 more points. I can essentially guarantee he does.

I'm not sure at all about that, and I followed both teams closely back then. For one thing, you're assuming the Oilers had better linemates than the Kings. But did they? The year before Gretzky went to L.A., the Kings were already 5th in NHL offense (Edmonton was 2nd). His first year in L.A., the Kings were easily the #1 team in the NHL for offense, while Edmonton fell to 5th. In 1989-90, despite a poor record, L.A. still had the #2 offense in the NHL, Edmonton 6th.

So clearly L.A. was a top offensive team. But what's interesting is that in Edmonton in his last full season (1986-87 = 79 games played), Gretzky factored into 49.2% of Edmonton's total goals; the year before (1985-86) it was 50.5%. But when he got to L.A., he factored into "only" 44.5% of their goals; the next year it was 42% (albeit he missed 7 games, so it might have actually been around 46%). In other words, his contribution to the team's offense was actually less (in the statistical sense) in L.A. than it had recently been in Edmonton, and L.A. was scoring more goals than Edmonton.

Now, almost certainly the Kings wouldn't have reached #1 in NHL offense without Gretzky, but they were nevertheless handily outscoring Edmonton even though Gretzky was contributing less to their offense (directly) than before. The evidence, therefore, doesn't suggest that Gretzky would have been much better off in Edmonton, points-wise.

I do think, though, that he would have scored more in Edmonton 1988-89 and maybe 1989-90, but it's not because of better linemates. It's more so because (a) that entire team/franchise was built around him, which makes it a more comfortable fit, and (b) Edmonton was a better team.

Gretzky had problems his first couple of years in L.A. with the coach (Robbie Ftorek, who benched him in one game) and the off-ice transactions (he was depressed and slumped badly when Bernie Nicholls was traded in early 1990) and the Kings' poor play in 1989-90. He hadn't been experiencing those kinds of things for many years in Edmonton.

 

[canucks4ever]

They were all great players with or without Gretzky, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Wayne's influence on them was enormous.

That's not true. Wayne had 2.32 PPG in 1986-87, and Coffey played 75% of the games with Gretzky. (Wayne then had a 7-point game in the playoffs with Coffey injured.) Then, in 1987-88, Wayne had 2.33 PPG without Coffey at all.
Not really. His production is more relevant to the success of his team, as I've argued elsewhere (the two factors are certainly related, but not equal).

Gretzky jumped from 137 points to 164 points not because his team improved by 5 points and scored 21 more goals than the year before (presumably), but because he was maturing and getting closer to his physical peak. But when he jumps from 164 points to 212, is it because (a) the Oilers scored 89 more goals, (b) the team improved 37 points in the standings, or (c) Gretzky just kept getting better? And don't points (a) and (b) mutually reinforce one another? In truth, it's a confluence of all these factors.

I'm not sure at all about that, and I followed both teams closely back then. For one thing, you're assuming the Oilers had better linemates than the Kings. But did they? The year before Gretzky went to L.A., the Kings were already 5th in NHL offense (Edmonton was 2nd). His first year in L.A., the Kings were easily the #1 team in the NHL for offense, while Edmonton fell to 5th. In 1989-90, despite a poor record, L.A. still had the #2 offense in the NHL, Edmonton 6th.

So clearly L.A. was a top offensive team. But what's interesting is that in Edmonton in his last full season (1986-87 = 79 games played), Gretzky factored into 49.2% of Edmonton's total goals; the year before (1985-86) it was 50.5%. But when he got to L.A., he factored into "only" 44.5% of their goals; the next year it was 42% (albeit he missed 7 games, so it might have actually been around 46%). In other words, his contribution to the team's offense was actually less (in the statistical sense) in L.A. than it had recently been in Edmonton, and L.A. was scoring more goals than Edmonton.

Now, almost certainly the Kings wouldn't have reached #1 in NHL offense without Gretzky, but they were nevertheless handily outscoring Edmonton even though Gretzky was contributing less to their offense (directly) than before. The evidence, therefore, doesn't suggest that Gretzky would have been much better off in Edmonton, points-wise.

What I meant was that from 84-86, Paul Coffey and Jari Kurri were both healthy and at thier peak, thats when Gretzky averaged 2.65 ppg. Then in 1987, Coffey started his injury problems and decline in production, in 1988 he was gone entirely. In both of those seasons he averaged 2.33 points per game. His 2.65 ppg average in 84-86 is a by-product of playing with coffey and kurri at thier absolute peaks IMO. I likely see him averaging 2.33 points per game in 1986 if Coffey isnt his offensive defenseman/4th forward.

 

[The Panther]

His 2.65 ppg average in 84-86 is a by-product of playing with coffey and kurri at thier absolute peaks IMO.

Or, perhaps Coffey and Kurri's peak seasons in 1983-84 through 1985-86 are the by-product of playing with Gretzky at his absolute peak. Things aren't so cut-and-dried as you're suggesting, is all I'm saying.

I likely see him averaging 2.33 points per game in 1986 if Coffey isnt his offensive defenseman/4th forward.

Yeah, but as I said, in 1986-87 Gretzky played 75% of his games with Coffey, and averaged 2.32 per game. A year later he averaged 2.33 per game entirely without Coffey.

Clearly then, his drop to 2.15 with L.A. has nothing to do with Coffey.

Don't get me wrong, Gretzky would have been better off with Kurri on his wing in 1989 and 1990 than with whomever he was paired with in L.A. I'm just saying that teammates alone DO NOT explain the 'drop' (if we can call it that) from 2.33 to 2.15. There are a multitude of factors. Gretzky had just married and was having a baby (well, Janet was), moved to a new country, a new climate, a new team, new coach and system, new teammates, non-hockey market, etc., etc. Teammates alone don't explain anything with a mega-talent like Wayne or Mario who clearly proved they can score at record-levels even with poor teams and average talent.

 

[canucks4ever]

Or, perhaps Coffey and Kurri's peak seasons in 1983-84 through 1985-86 are the by-product of playing with Gretzky at his absolute peak. Things aren't so cut-and-dried as you're suggesting, is all I'm saying.

Yeah, but as I said, in 1986-87 Gretzky played 75% of his games with Coffey, and averaged 2.32 per game. A year later he averaged 2.33 per game entirely without Coffey.

Clearly then, his drop to 2.15 with L.A. has nothing to do with Coffey.

Don't get me wrong, Gretzky would have been better off with Kurri on his wing in 1989 and 1990 than with whomever he was paired with in L.A. I'm just saying that teammates alone DO NOT explain the 'drop' (if we can call it that) from 2.33 to 2.15. There are a multitude of factors. Gretzky had just married and was having a baby (well, Janet was), moved to a new country, a new climate, a new team, new coach and system, new teammates, non-hockey market, etc., etc. Teammates alone don't explain anything with a mega-talent like Wayne or Mario who clearly proved they can score at record-levels even with poor teams and average talent.

Yeah and coffey's lack of production in 1987 also saw gretzky's production drop from 2.65 to 2.33, that's my main point. Coffey clearly had injuries and wasn't the same that year, which saw Gretzky's production drop.

As for Mario, he averaged 2.03 ppg in 1988 without Coffey for 31 games, and 2.29 ppg with coffey for 46 games.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lemieux is the only player between gretzky and himself that scored at a 200 point pace without Coffey. With 2.67 in 93

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

Lemieux is the only player between gretzky and himself that scored at a 200 point pace without Coffey. With 2.67 in 93

True, but Gretzky also scored 92 goals and 120 assists in 81-82 when Coffey only put up 89 points in 80 games. That's a great showing for a defenseman, but it still wasn't Coffey as we would know him yet. Only Anderson broke 90 points that year (105, less than half of Gretzky's total).

In 92-93, Larry Murphy put up 85 points in 83 games. Outside of Lemieux, Pittsburgh also had four players break 90 points (Stevens with 111 in 72 games, Tocchet with 109 in 80, Francis with 100 in 84, and Jagr with 94 in 81).

Truth of the matter is, Gretzky and Lemieux demonstrated their peak abilities before their teams caught up with them (Gretzky in 81-82, Lemieux in 88-89). Even when their teams became powerhouses, there wasn't much difference in their respective performances (2.65 points/game to 2.77 points/game in 83-84 for Gretzky; 2.62 points/game to 2.67 points/game in 92-93 for Lemieux).

 

[daver]

What I meant was that from 84-86, Paul Coffey and Jari Kurri were both healthy and at thier peak, thats when Gretzky averaged 2.65 ppg. Then in 1987, Coffey started his injury problems and decline in production, in 1988 he was gone entirely. In both of those seasons he averaged 2.33 points per game. His 2.65 ppg average in 84-86 is a by-product of playing with coffey and kurri at thier absolute peaks IMO. I likely see him averaging 2.33 points per game in 1986 if Coffey isnt his offensive defenseman/4th forward.

Wasn't Wayne's other linemate during his 200 point runs Dave Semenko? Don't you think he would have a better set of linemates in today's game?

 

[daver]

True, but Gretzky also scored 92 goals and 120 assists in 81-82 when Coffey only put up 89 points in 80 games. That's a great showing for a defenseman, but it still wasn't Coffey as we would know him yet. Only Anderson broke 90 points that year (105, less than half of Gretzky's total).

In 92-93, Larry Murphy put up 85 points in 83 games. Outside of Lemieux, Pittsburgh also had four players break 90 points (Stevens with 111 in 72 games, Tocchet with 109 in 80, Francis with 100 in 84, and Jagr with 94 in 81).

Truth of the matter is, Gretzky and Lemieux demonstrated their peak abilities before their teams caught up with them (Gretzky in 81-82, Lemieux in 88-89). Even when their teams became powerhouses, there wasn't much difference in their respective performances (2.65 points/game to 2.77 points/game in 83-84 for Gretzky; 2.62 points/game to 2.67 points/game in 92-93 for Lemieux).

I can't see how anyone can make a reasonable case that Coffey and/or Kurri was the catalyst in pumping up Wayne's totals in 1982. If this was the accepted reason then, in theory, when Coffey and Kurri were putting up 130 point seasons, Wayne's numbers should have gone up into the 230 or 240s.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

True, but Gretzky also scored 92 goals and 120 assists in 81-82 when Coffey only put up 89 points in 80 games. That's a great showing for a defenseman, but it still wasn't Coffey as we would know him yet. Only Anderson broke 90 points that year (105, less than half of Gretzky's total).

In 92-93, Larry Murphy put up 85 points in 83 games. Outside of Lemieux, Pittsburgh also had four players break 90 points (Stevens with 111 in 72 games, Tocchet with 109 in 80, Francis with 100 in 84, and Jagr with 94 in 81).

Truth of the matter is, Gretzky and Lemieux demonstrated their peak abilities before their teams caught up with them (Gretzky in 81-82, Lemieux in 88-89). Even when their teams became powerhouses, there wasn't much difference in their respective performances (2.65 points/game to 2.77 points/game in 83-84 for Gretzky; 2.62 points/game to 2.67 points/game in 92-93 for Lemieux).

I just think what lemieux did in the early 90's and in 96 is extremely impressive given how much goalies and defence had improved from the early 80's.

Even when lemieux hit 199 in 89 it was still a much better league than the 1982.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I just think what lemieux did in the early 90's and in 96 is extremely impressive given how much goalies and defence had improved from the early 80's.

Even when lemieux hit 199 in 89 it was still a much better league than the 1982.

I think what Lemieux did in his comeback was even more impressive...he was 35, with a bad back, a "bad" heart, out of shape and rusty...and he lapped the floor with the competition.

People will trot out Selanne, Jagr, and Bourque as examples of players who dominated in multiple different NHL eras despite age and fatigue against cries that Gretzky and Lemieux would not dominate in today's league. But Lemieux himself is the perfect example.

 

[The Panther]

I think what Lemieux did in his comeback was even more impressive...he was 35, with a bad back, a "bad" heart, out of shape and rusty...and he lapped the floor with the competition.

Except he was outscored by his teammate...

 

[Hawksfan2828]

Probably 130-140, both Lemieux and Gretzky were so close career wise in PPG. I believe Gretzky is 1.92 and Lemieux is 1.88, so I'm not going to split hairs..

 

[Hawksfan2828]

I think what Lemieux did in his comeback was even more impressive...he was 35, with a bad back, a "bad" heart, out of shape and rusty...and he lapped the floor with the competition.

People will trot out Selanne, Jagr, and Bourque as examples of players who dominated in multiple different NHL eras despite age and fatigue against cries that Gretzky and Lemieux would not dominate in today's league. But Lemieux himself is the perfect example.

Gretzky and Lemieux were pretty much equal on every level except for one - size, and Mario knew how to use it...

It's so weird, they were similar players except they weren't..

 

[livewell68]

Gretzky and Lemieux were pretty much equal on every level except for one - size, and Mario knew how to use it...

It's so weird, they were similar players except they weren't..

While Lemieux had a high IQ and vision, I think this element of his game has become highly overrated with time.

If Lemieux was Gretzky's size, I don't think he would be nearly as good of a player. His size and reach were probably the biggest reason he was so successful.

Call me crazy but I think Howe and Orr had better IQ's for the game than Lemieux did.

 

[livewell68]

Probably 130-140, both Lemieux and Gretzky were so close career wise in PPG. I believe Gretzky is 1.92 and Lemieux is 1.88, so I'm not going to split hairs..

Just look at the discrepancy in games player.

Gretzky also played far more games after his prime than Lemieux did, especially considering Lemieux sat 3 full seasons just as he had left his prime. What's to say that age and fatigue and injuries don't actually catch up with by say 1997-98? After all, his game saw a significant dip from 1995-96 to 1996-97.

 

[Big Phil]

Yeah, he would win art rosses by that type of margin, not 60-70 points.

Crosby in 2014 wins the Art Ross by 17 points and it wasn't a particular memorable season. Gretzky beat Dionne by 29 points as a 19 year old and you think this is the best he does today? That's really selling the guy short.

So you think Wayne peaked at 164 points as a 20 year old and his 200 plus point seasons were a product of linemates. You do know he scored almost 40 more goals in 1982 right? Don't you think that would have boosted the point totals of his teammates not the other way around.

No, as we saw in 1982 before the other Oilers really hit their peaks he was still cracking 92 goals and 212 points. 1981 was not his peak.

What I meant was that from 84-86, Paul Coffey and Jari Kurri were both healthy and at thier peak, thats when Gretzky averaged 2.65 ppg. Then in 1987, Coffey started his injury problems and decline in production, in 1988 he was gone entirely. In both of those seasons he averaged 2.33 points per game. His 2.65 ppg average in 84-86 is a by-product of playing with coffey and kurri at thier absolute peaks IMO. I likely see him averaging 2.33 points per game in 1986 if Coffey isnt his offensive defenseman/4th forward.

Well............
Gretzky PPG in 1982 - 2.65 (his 3rd highest in his career)

But he had multiple 100 point teammates right? Well...........
Anderson - 105
Coffey - 89
Messier - 88
Kurri - 86

Anderson was 2nd on the Oilers in points and in PPG with 1.31.

Gretzky doubled his next best teammate before the big guns started putting up their gaudy point totals. Come on ushvinder, the jig is up here! Isn't it time to give credit where it is due?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Nice little clip of an all-star skill contest where both Gretzky and Lemieux go on a breakaway challenge against Patrick Roy:



Look how intimidating Lemieux looks when he's coming on that breakaway, even the way he skates.Poor Roy.

Also, notice the almost uncatchable head-fake Lemieux did.

 

[Big Phil]

Nice little clip of an all-star skill contest where both Gretzky and Lemieux go on a breakaway challenge against Patrick Roy:



Look how intimidating Lemieux looks when he's coming on that breakaway, even the way he skates.Poor Roy.

Also, notice the almost uncatchable head-fake Lemieux did.

I know it was an All-Star game and we shouldn't put all that much stock into it, but this is still Patrick Roy and I guarantee he is trying to stop that penalty shot from Lemieux. The thing is Lemieux made the best of goalies curl up into a ball on a penalty shot. How many players had the luxury of being patient on a breakaway? To an extent I guess Datsyuk and Kane have made jaw dropping plays on a breakaway by just turning the goalie into mush but no one did it quite like Lemieux. It was almost as if he is a cobra snake coming in on his prey and the goalie is the person just hoping not to get bitten by him and survive.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I know it was an All-Star game and we shouldn't put all that much stock into it, but this is still Patrick Roy and I guarantee he is trying to stop that penalty shot from Lemieux. The thing is Lemieux made the best of goalies curl up into a ball on a penalty shot. How many players had the luxury of being patient on a breakaway? To an extent I guess Datsyuk and Kane have made jaw dropping plays on a breakaway by just turning the goalie into mush but no one did it quite like Lemieux. It was almost as if he is a cobra snake coming in on his prey and the goalie is the person just hoping not to get bitten by him and survive.

It wasn't a penalty shot, probably the breakaway contest.

Regardless I agree with every you said, especially that Roy tried his very best to stop both.Roy has pride and he has the two greatest forwards of his generation coming at him, he will try anything he can to stop them, all-star skills contest or not.

Yeah, Lemieux looks like a predator coming in.No stress.

 

[Big Phil]

It wasn't a penalty shot, probably the breakaway contest.

Regardless I agree with every you said, especially that Roy tried his very best to stop both.Roy has pride and he has the two greatest forwards of his generation coming at him, he will try anything he can to stop them, all-star skills contest or not.

Yeah, Lemieux looks like a predator coming in.No stress.

Oh no, I realize it was. Lemieux could even turn a breakaway into something slow motion

 

[squaleca]

anyone who thinks a 23 year old wayne gretzky coulndt put up 100 assists 50 goals in any era needs his head examined

 

[squaleca]

ok supposed we take exactly half of waynes points away from him from 81 to 87 hes still avg more than 100 points

 

[squaleca]

212
196
205 in 74 games
208
215
183

in 6 straight seasons and say this guy couldnt dominate any era