Is Wayne Gretzky Getting Underrated on This Board?

[KPower]

You obviously never grew up watching Gretzky. I did. Barzal at his best possesses 50% of Gretzky’s IQ and vision.

People forget that although today’s skill and training levels are higher than in any previous era, the talent levels in previous eras are certainly higher than in today’s NHL. Skill (coaching, training, technology, diet, systems) is very different than talent (innate ability) They are not the same thing.

You compare Barzal to Gretzky, when even a comparison of Crosby or Ovechkin to Gretzky is ludicrous!

That guy said Barzal would score 200 points? Holy f*** I gotta stop reading this shit.

 

[Mbraunm]

-Crosby missed 3 years in his prime because of serious career ending injuries
-Pavel Bure blew out both knees in his prime by 20, one of the best Ever that was never the same
-Teemu Selaan blew his ACL and MCL, after scoring 75 goals as a rookie
-Mario Lemieux-Cancer ruined multiple seasons, including breaking 220 points in a single season. Spinal Disc ruined overall numbers

-Players like Wayne and Ovi played on All Star Teams their entire career, and never had injury problems. The Era-Adjusted All Time Stats has Lemieux number 1 overall, and Crosby neck and neck with Wayne. Had Crosby not had a 3 year absence from the NHL, the Pens probably have 4+ cups, and Crosby would be #1 in era adjusted stats.

Even at Crosby’s peak prior to his injuries, his era adjusted scoring is embarrassingly crushed by Gretzky’s. At no point in Crosby’s career has his era adjusted scoring approach Gretzky levels.

Again, Crosby is just not in Gretzky’s tier. What an insult to Gretzky! A fairer comparison would be players like Hull, Esposito, Jagr, Forsberg or Ovechkin.

 

[Gunnersaurus Rex]

This discussion always drives me nuts. In my opinion, the best way to look at how great Gretzky was, or any other player, is to compare him to other players of his time. Yes, Gretzky played in an offensive era, but he also outscored everyone by 50% most of the time. There has never been another player who has done that. Not even close.

Those people that say Gretzky would never score 50 pts in todays game forget the equipment, training, travel, nutrition advances that have been made and how they benefit players today. He was too slow? skates and equipment are faster and lighter now,. Shot not hard enough?, try using that crappy Titan stick compared to todays sticks. Not big enough or strong enough?, players back then barely worked out, so if he played today, you can bet he would be bigger, stronger and faster.

If you never saw Gretzky play, you truly cannot appreciate the vision he had on the ice.

It's hard to compare era's, but again, if it was so easy to score 200 points per season in the 80's, how come nobody else did?

 

[Stephen]

You obviously never grew up watching Gretzky. I did. Barzal at his best possesses 50% of Gretzky’s IQ and vision.

People forget that although today’s skill and training levels are higher than in any previous era, the talent levels in previous eras are certainly higher than in today’s NHL. Skill (coaching, training, technology, diet, systems) is very different than talent (innate ability) They are not the same thing.

You compare Barzal to Gretzky, when even a comparison of Crosby or Ovechkin to Gretzky is ludicrous!

Out of touch comment. Without diminishing anything of Gretzky's accomplishment or trying to compare him with Barzal, the game is played at a much higher speed in 2018 than 1980-1999, so the pace in which the average NHLer is processing necessarily means the good ones are going to have elite hockey IQ.

 

[leafsfuture]

This discussion always drives me nuts. In my opinion, the best way to look at how great Gretzky was, or any other player, is to compare him to other players of his time. Yes, Gretzky played in an offensive era, but he also outscored everyone by 50% most of the time. There has never been another player who has done that. Not even close.

Those people that say Gretzky would never score 50 pts in todays game forget the equipment, training, travel, nutrition advances that have been made and how they benefit players today. He was too slow? skates and equipment are faster and lighter now,. Shot not hard enough?, try using that crappy Titan stick compared to todays sticks. Not big enough or strong enough?, players back then barely worked out, so if he played today, you can bet he would be bigger, stronger and faster.

If you never saw Gretzky play, you truly cannot appreciate the vision he had on the ice.

It's hard to compare era's, but again, if it was so easy to score 200 points per season in the 80's, how come nobody else did?

100% agree here.

Top 100 all timers like Marcel Dionne, Mike Bossy, Brian Trottier couldn’t come within 60-70 points of Wayne.

Mario was literally the only one who could be in the same league.

 

[RageQuit77]

Maybe worst sin of Wayne was/is that he totally ruined the illusion we could somehow meaningfully compare the game and stats over different eras. He was so much above his peers of his own era. Measurably. Unfortunately his records ruin all neat, simple comparisons, we are often so eager to seek for our statements about players and eras. We talk about high scoring '80s and how easy it was score then, but we forget that Gretzky's direct impact to league's high scoring level is itself measurable and high. His presence on ice changed and was big part the game in way we now perceive "high scoring" era.

He was skinny guy who needed bodyguard. Skinny guy made plays on level nobody ever, after or since, and while goaltending and defense were allegedly abysmal compared to more athletic, tactical, quality eras of hockey, the skinny guy was still the one who managed to score those record amounts of goals.

We cannot sherry pick evidence across different eras to proof something and leave counter-evidence aside to make our case. Circumstances were same for Wayne than they were for his "underperforming" more athletic peers and fellow players.

While I'm not particularly "Gretzky-lover" I still wonder: "How anybody wouldn't love him for what he did?"

 

[Stephen]

You can really tell who understands the game in this thread. Gretzky was scoring 90 points, finished top 5 in points his second last season with a broken down back and he was still a top 5 scorer in the game! But a 21 year old Gretzky couldnt do that now?? A 43 year old Jagr could still put up first line numbers (66 points) 2 years ago, but a prime Gretzky, the greatest player ever would only put up 20 more than old washed up Jagr???

Or another guy like Lidstrom. He was still dominant into his 40s with the players in todays game and hes not even close to Wayne. People like to pretend the game is way better now than it was in the 80s... yeah its lower scoring. But people seem to forget Gretzky still dominated the 90s where plenty of guys overlapped the current players.

Sakic was 36 or 37 in 2007 as a top scorer in the league against guys like Crosby. He wasnt close to Gretzky either but still in his old age was a dominant player. Todays league isnt as high powered and amazing as a lot of people like to pretend compared to the 90s. 4th liners can skate faster, but top line guys dont play against 4th liners anyways. The top end talent was better in the 90s, and Gretzky was by far the best

The greats will always transcend eras and thrive in their own ways, but it doesn't really change the comment that the way Gretzky scored so many of his points in the first half of his career are simply plays that don't happen with any frequency in the game anymore. There's been an entire generation or two of goaltending, coaching and defensive evolution that has systematically tried to prevent those plays and another generation of offensive tactics that have tried to overcome those strategies.

 

[newfy]

The greats will always transcend eras and thrive in their own ways, but it doesn't really change the comment that the way Gretzky scored so many of his points in the first half of his career are simply plays that don't happen with any frequency in the game anymore. There's been an entire generation or two of goaltending, coaching and defensive evolution that has systematically tried to prevent those plays and another generation of offensive tactics that have tried to overcome those strategies.

Ya I dont think Gretzky is putting up 4 seasons on pace for over 200 anymore. I do think he would be by far the best player in the league still, I wouldnt be surprised if he put up 140 points in a year like this with 2nd place guys being down around 100

 

[Mbraunm]

Out of touch comment. Without diminishing anything of Gretzky's accomplishment or trying to compare him with Barzal, the game is played at a much higher speed in 2018 than 1980-1999, so the pace in which the average NHLer is processing necessarily means the good ones are going to have elite hockey IQ.

Not necessarily true at all. Less IQ is required in today’s predictably concrete and systems based game than in any previous era. And yes, the game is evidently faster due to better equipment, training and shortened shifts but you underestimate talent in previous eras.
Take today’s NHL’ers and put them into previous era’s with the equipment, training and coaching from those eras.The result would be highly disappointing for many young fans as they would witness no discernible differences. Crosby may or may not outcompete players like Jagr, Lindros, Lidstrom, Sakic, Forsberg, and so on for hardware.
However, what wouldn’t change would be that Gretzky, in his prime, would dominate regardless. Most experts and mathematical models make this easy prediction.

Nothing controversial here.

 

[Stephen]

100% agree here.

Top 100 all timers like Marcel Dionne, Mike Bossy, Brian Trottier couldn’t come within 60-70 points of Wayne.

Mario was literally the only one who could be in the same league.

That's a bit of statistical cherry picking, wouldn't you say? Using the exact same logic as "Gretzky was still scoring in the 90s against younger stars argument," a 29 year old Marcel Dionne tied Gretzky for scoring during his rookie season. Dionne also put up more 100 point seasons in the 80s than he did in his earlier physical prime in the 1970s. Doesn't it stand to reason that if Marcel Dionne was a young man in the 80s he could have put up 150-180 points and approached Gretzky's totals?

 

[Stephen]

Not necessarily true at all. Less IQ is required in today’s predictably concrete and systems based game than in any previous era. And yes, the game is evidently faster due to better equipment, training and shortened shifts but you underestimate talent in previous eras.
Take today’s NHL’ers and put them into previous era’s with the equipment, training and coaching from those eras.The result would be highly disappointing for many young fans as they would witness no discernible differences. Crosby may or may not outcompete players like Jagr, Lindros, Lidstrom, Sakic, Forsberg, and so on for hardware.
However, what wouldn’t change would be that Gretzky, in his prime, would dominate regardless. Most experts and mathematical models make this easy prediction.

Nothing controversial here.

I'm not debating whether Gretzky would dominate, but that magnitude of domination gets scaled down.

The game's played at a very high pace now, and maybe you don't need high IQ necessarily to operate in it as your average 4th liner but someone like Connor McDavid is processing and reacting and creating at an extremely high rate.

I'd make the argument that if Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr all started their careers at 1979-80, and throw in Dionne, Hull, Yzerman, Sakic, Lindros, Ovechkin, Lafleur, Beliveau, Howe, Forsberg McDavid, Crosby, Jagr in for just for kicks, they'd all find a way to put up some satisfying numbers.

 

[authentic]

You obviously never grew up watching Gretzky. I did. Barzal at his best possesses 50% of Gretzky’s IQ and vision.

People forget that although today’s skill and training levels are higher than in any previous era, the talent levels in previous eras are certainly higher than in today’s NHL. Skill (coaching, training, technology, diet, systems) is very different than talent (innate ability) They are not the same thing.

You compare Barzal to Gretzky, when even a comparison of Crosby or Ovechkin to Gretzky is ludicrous!

You claim to know which era had the most innate ability? Are you god?

 

[MessierII]

Yes. People get caught up in numbers. Forget about the numbers let me know when someone leads the league in points 7 straight years, 10 times overall and wins 9 Hart’s.

 

[Boud]

You claim to know which era had the most innate ability? Are you god?

God is Gretzky actually.

 

[XanderCrews34]

Comparing guys across eras is fun but it's so impossible given the differences in the game. It's like wondering if Montana could quarterback in the modern NFL. Sure maybe he could? Maybe he couldn't? All I know is he was the best in his era and that should count for a lot.

The greatest of all-time debates are a little bit silly. It's so hard to do it across eras. But in humoring myself for an answer, I have always measured it by this scenario:

If I had to win one game, who do I pick first? For me that's a healthy Lemieux.

Next would have been Gretzky. Pretty much regardless of the era. So if almost everyone considers him 1 or 2 (or 3 if you want to throw in Orr) then I don't think he's really underrated.

 

[GreatGonzo]

-False, False, False. After 1991 Wayne broke 121 points a total of 1 time in the 90's. As time went on his stats dropped faster then Titanic. And he always had Elite talent around him. Stick him on Arizona or Buffalo in his prime this year and his stats or fall even further off the cliff.

Ya, do you know what happened in 1991? The Suter hit. Do you also know what happened? He got older, slower, aged....shocker I know, it’s almost as if players slow down as time goes on. From ‘92-‘99, he sits 2nd in points and 1st in assists.....not to shabby.

Are you actually suggesting Gretzky was a product of the talent around him? He’s the best playmaker of all time, how do you think his linemates scored so much?

Your obviously young and have no clue what your taking about, nit picking in ridiculous ways to push an agenda that is far beyond silly.

Yeah, and everyone feasted on the terrible goaltending, from Gretzky to Dennis Maruk to the point where a dozen years after Gretzky arrived, your run of the mill first liner was probably scoring 90-100 points any given season.

Gretzky wouldn't be a 50 point scorer in 2018, but I don't think he's compiling 150 points streaking in off the left wing and scoring on a low slapper to beat a goalie along the ice either. There's an entire system of goaltending that's taken that away by playing those high frequency shots and then entire defensive systems which create so much back pressure.

except the biggest difference is Maruk had ONE amazing season, while Gretzky had the best single seasons ever recorded. Your comparison is terrible.

Is Patrick kane can score 100+ points in this era....if Jamie Benn could win a scoring title....if PHIL KESSEL can be in the hunt for the Art Ross, then I’m pretty sure the greatest player of all time would be fine in this era. Because Kessel, Benn, and Kane are not even close to the level of Gretzky, yet they have found a lot of success.

Look at 1997 and 1998 for crying out loud. Why is that being pushed away? Why is that being ignored? Were those 2 years riddled with bad goalies, defenses, and higher scoring....no. They actually had a lot of talent that puts a majority of the players of today in the doghouse, yet Gretzky was right there with them. What’s the excuse for that? What do many of you have to speculate on that?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

If anything Lemieux is underrated. This is the only player that could step in the ring with Gretzky and go pound for pound and yet Howe is a better player? GTFO

 

[RageQuit77]

If anything Lemieux is underrated. This is the only player that could step in the ring with Gretzky and go pound for pound and yet Howe is a better player? GTFO

Agreed. But Mario endured in that ring only what 6 periods when Gretzky made it to the end of full 12. [and this would be the place for endless what ifs]

But still, let's not sell Gordie short here either. After all he was the guy whom both Wayne and Mario looked up as their idol.

 

[Thenameless]

I'd make the argument that if Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr all started their careers at 1979-80, and throw in Dionne, Hull, Yzerman, Sakic, Lindros, Ovechkin, Lafleur, Beliveau, Howe, Forsberg McDavid, Crosby, Jagr in for just for kicks, they'd all find a way to put up some satisfying numbers.

Now that would be something to behold.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Agreed. But Mario endured in that ring only what 6 periods when Gretzky made it to the end of full 12. [and this would be the place for endless what ifs]

But still, let's not sell Gordie short here either. After all he was the guy whom both Wayne and Mario looked up as their idol.

Yes he was their idol. Actually with Lemieux I believe it was lafleur and beliveau.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Now that would be something to behold.

Lemieux and Gretzky would go back and forth with the art Ross and hart. Feel bad for the others lol

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Agreed. But Mario endured in that ring only what 6 periods when Gretzky made it to the end of full 12. [and this would be the place for endless what ifs]

But still, let's not sell Gordie short here either. After all he was the guy whom both Wayne and Mario looked up as their idol.

And if Mario only went 6 rounds. At least he won some of those rounds. Any other player would be knocked out in round 1. Lol funny boxing analogy but it gets the job done

 

[Thenameless]

Yes he was their idol. Actually with Lemieux I believe it was lafleur and beliveau.

Lafleur looked up to Beliveau, and Lemieux looked up to Lafleur. Lemieux should have been a Hab. This is the great travesty in hockey. Although I am glad that he helped save the Penguins franchise.

 

[RageQuit77]

And if Mario only went 6 rounds. At least he won some of those rounds. Any other player would be knocked out in round 1. Lol funny boxing analogy but it gets the job done

True.

 

[Thenameless]

Lemieux and Gretzky would go back and forth with the art Ross and hart. Feel bad for the others lol

I've always been more of a Lemieux fan over Gretzky, but I think Gretzky would win more scoring titles. He brought his A-game every night, and he would not let up even when his team was up 6-2 in the third. The Lemieux that didn't try was about 85% of Gretzky, and the Lemieux that gave his all was about 105% of Gretzky, but the problem is he just didn't bring it enough.