Who Had More Pure Ability: Gretzky Or Lemieux?

[GlitchMarner]

I think most if not all of us can agree that Gretzky had a better career, but I was watching a video on YouTube and saw that a number of people said that Lemieux was the better player of the two...





Pinned by SPORTSNET
Christian Katic1 week ago
"People will debate whether or not this is true, but I think he is the greatest of all time."

Johnathan Brabant1 week ago
Greatest player to ever lace up the skates imo. Gretzky was great, but Mario was super. Injuries stopped him from being #1 officially.

PowerPlay 061 week ago (edited)
This is great, if not for illness, he would surpass Gretzky

Kreutz1 week ago
Mario Lemieux was the Michael Jordan of ice hockey.


I believe it's quite clear that Lemieux was the fancier and flashier stickhandler of the two, but "ability" also includes the mental aspects of hockey and things such as vision, anticipation and passing ability.

Which player had more pure ability?

Click to read more...

 

[TT1]

Obviously Lemieux had the best physical tools in NHL history, goes without saying. Gretzky had by far the best "sense" (IQ/vision/decision making etc.).

Based on your definition of pure ability (physical and mental), the answer is probably Gretzky.

 

[ccman68]

Gretzky AINEC

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Lemieux was better but career got shortened by injuries.

 

[Thenameless]

I'm more of a Lemieux fan. There was something about Gretzky that's hard to quantify, but he had a better ability to bring his A-game night in, night out. He played every game and every shift like his team needed to score. Don Cherry called Lemieux a floater especially early on his career, and he wasn't lying. Gretzky brought 98% of Lemieux's ability 100% of the time. Lemieux brought 100% of his ability 70% off the time. We'd see flashes of Lemieux's brilliance that would make us ooh and aah, but even accounting for his bad back and cancer, he still left too much on the table comparatively speaking.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Lemieux was not better than Gretzky, sorry.

 

[Albatros]

Lemieux, he could have been the best player in the league even in today's NHL.

 

[Polar Bear]

Gretzky.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Lemieux, he could have been the best player in the league even in today's NHL.

Sure, if Gretzky never existed.

Unfortunately, that never happened.

 

[Albatros]

Gretzky struggled with the game changing even during his own time.

 

[Tage2Tuch]

The way I see it....

Mario had the better overall tools as a complete player.

Wayne had the better hockey IQ, vision and playmaking ability.

Both guys saw the game actual seconds before other players and had amazing hands, and were great leaders who won multiple cups. What amaEs
Me is how Mario as a player only won two and Gretzky only one cups with just one team considering of the games nost elte players most of them stuck to just one team outside Wayne.


I didn’t like Mario but I think he at his prime could be the most dominant player in any ice, any place, any time, anywhere in the history of hockey. (Shout our to jagr, Orr and forsberg/lindros for being This way too)

 

[snipes]

Obviously Lemieux had the best physical tools in NHL history, goes without saying. Gretzky had by far the best "sense" (IQ/vision/decision making etc.).

Based on your definition of pure ability (physical and mental), the answer is probably Gretzky.

Bobby Orr had the best physical tools in NHL history.

He also brought a level of physicality and toughness (he was a viscous fighter like Howe was) that Lemieux couldn’t come close to matching. Bobby Orr is the best two way hockey player of all time, offensive tools it’s close but factoring in Orr’s complete game I don’t see how he’s not #1 in history.

As for the poll, Lemieux obviously had better physical tools than Gretzky. As we all know it was Gretzky’s hockey IQ that separated him not his raw physical gifts.

 

[GlitchMarner]

Gretzky struggled with the game changing even during his own time.

That was following the serious back injury caused by Suter, though. He wasn't the same physically (was into his 30s as well).

 

[Oddbob]

I think Lemieux was the better athlete, but Gretzky was the smarter player. Deking and shooting go to Mario, but playmaking and vision go to Gretzky.

 

[rumrokh]

"Pure ability" is a weird and misleading term. Is there some kind of "impure" ability? Are you just asking about stick skills in a weird way?

Skill/ability is a huge pile of things that funnel into one: whatever best helps your team win. That doesn't necessarily help anybody know the answer to this question, but I think you definitely won't get the best answers with the way you've asked it.

 

[Albatros]

Is there some kind of "impure" ability?

Avery?

 

[SML2]

Lemieux had prototype size. Gretzky had the kind that makes scouts go "Really?" That's why Gretzky in my mind, was better, even though Lemieux was the most terrifying player I've ever seen. There's no logical explanation for Gretzky being dominant. There is for Lemieux.

 

[snipes]

Lemieux had prototype size. Gretzky had the kind that makes scouts go "Really?" That's why Gretzky in my mind, was better, even though Lemieux was the most terrifying player I've ever seen. There's no logical explanation for Gretzky being dominant. There is for Lemieux.

Could you imagine being a D man seeing him barreling down at you one on one with the puck on his stick?

 

[hockeyguy1967]

Gretz and it really isnt close. In fact Lemieux would be 4th all time

 

[GlitchMarner]

Gretz and it really isnt close. In fact Lemieux would be 4th all time

Do you think Lemieux is fourth when it comes to overall ability (not counting health or durability), though?

 

[KidLine93]

Lemieux had better size and raw skill.

Gretzky was better at playing hockey

 

[Turin]

Lemieux.

 

[Eisen]

I don't know what pure ability is but everything Lemieux did, Gretzky did better. So I guess that includes pure ability.

 

[Darz]

Gretzky by quite a bit.

 

[CupInSIX]

Lemieux could wake up from a 6 month coma and get 3 points the next night