Who Had More Pure Ability: Gretzky Or Lemieux?

[TheOtherOne]

Hey dudes here are Wayne and Mario's career arcs side-by-side fyi you're welcome.

 

[Steven Toast]

Hey dudes here are Wayne and Mario's career arcs side-by-side fyi you're welcome.

View attachment 345998

Neat chart.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Gretzky wasn't in his prime in 1989, he had been on the decline for several years. His prime was from 1982-1986. His 21 year old to 25 year old seasons.

Lemieux's 1989 campaign was pretty clearly his best season. He set a career high in goals, assists and points. That's also true if you look at hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points. It was also his 2nd most productive season in goals per game, assists per game, and points per game (behind 1993, but way ahead of any of his other years).

Gretzky's 1989 season was probably his 7th best year, give or take. It was the 7th highest goal total of his career, 8th highest assist total, and 7th highest point total. It ranked 6th, T-6th, and 8th in hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points, respectively. On a per-game basis, it was T-6th, 9th, and 8th in goals, assists and points per game, respectively.

So it's true that Lemieux's best season was better than Gretzky's 7th (?) best year. But I'm not sure what the point of this obviously biased comparison is supposed to be.

If a fair comparison is done (ie best season to best season, 2nd best to 2nd best, etc.), Gretzky is decisively ahead.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

He had just scored 43 points in 19 playoff games. Seems pretty prime to me.

Lol keep hugging that 19 game sample size.

Actually that’s all we get with Lemieux is what if’s and sample sizes.

Gretzky wins another poll vs Lemieux. In fact, since it’s a small margin (and in another poll where Lemieux was carried by Orr), this would be a smoking right? I mean you’re the same guy who trumpeted 27 more votes as being that so why not 7?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Hey dudes here are Wayne and Mario's career arcs side-by-side fyi you're welcome.

View attachment 345998

Out of curiosity - what's the source for the adjusted numbers? They look like they're in the right ballpark (or skating rink), but just wondering.

 

[TheOtherOne]

Out of curiosity - what's the source for the adjusted numbers? They look like they're in the right ballpark (or skating rink), but just wondering.

Sorry I don't have that info. My source for the original chart is this quote:

Gretzky had the better career but in terms of actual talent, they're pretty close.

Here's an era-adjusted PPG list someone(forgot who) made a couple of years ago.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lol keep hugging that 19 game sample size.

Actually that’s all we get with Lemieux is what if’s and sample sizes.

Gretzky wins another poll vs Lemieux. In fact, since it’s a small margin (and in another poll where Lemieux was carried by Orr), this would be a smoking right? I mean you’re the same guy who trumpeted 27 more votes as being that so why not 7?

Yup Gretzky was washed up at 27 years old. Nothing further to discuss

 

[MAJR]

With improving goaltending and defensive play his goal scoring fell off a cliff and forced him to focus on making plays instead of finishing them. He remained a great playmaker but was no longer a great goal scorer.

Fell off a cliff? 20 pts in 15 playoff games at age 36 and 90 regular seasin points at age 37, in his penultimate season, all smack dab in the middle of the DPE with a cardboard back, is falling off a cliff? I guess everything is relative for Gretzky. And you think it's coincidental that Gretzky's last 40-goal season finished just months before the infamous Suter hit?

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Yup Gretzky was washed up at 27 years old. Nothing further to discuss

That’s an incredibly dumb take. You know it too.

 

[Steven Toast]

Yup Gretzky was washed up at 27 years old. Nothing further to discuss

Not in his prime =/= washed up. Come up with some real arguments.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Lemieux's 1989 campaign was pretty clearly his best season. He set a career high in goals, assists and points. That's also true if you look at hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points. It was also his 2nd most productive season in goals per game, assists per game, and points per game (behind 1993, but way ahead of any of his other years).

Gretzky's 1989 season was probably his 7th best year, give or take. It was the 7th highest goal total of his career, 8th highest assist total, and 7th highest point total. It ranked 6th, T-6th, and 8th in hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points, respectively. On a per-game basis, it was T-6th, 9th, and 8th in goals, assists and points per game, respectively.

So it's true that Lemieux's best season was better than Gretzky's 7th (?) best year. But I'm not sure what the point of this obviously biased comparison is supposed to be.

If a fair comparison is done (ie best season to best season, 2nd best to 2nd best, etc.), Gretzky is decisively ahead.

Why does @Vegito ignore this post?

oh. Because he knows it’s right.

Then again, what do I expect from someone who thinks Gretzky was washed up at 27

 

[bobholly39]

Lemieux's 1989 campaign was pretty clearly his best season. He set a career high in goals, assists and points. That's also true if you look at hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points. It was also his 2nd most productive season in goals per game, assists per game, and points per game (behind 1993, but way ahead of any of his other years).

Gretzky's 1989 season was probably his 7th best year, give or take. It was the 7th highest goal total of his career, 8th highest assist total, and 7th highest point total. It ranked 6th, T-6th, and 8th in hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points, respectively. On a per-game basis, it was T-6th, 9th, and 8th in goals, assists and points per game, respectively.

So it's true that Lemieux's best season was better than Gretzky's 7th (?) best year. But I'm not sure what the point of this obviously biased comparison is supposed to be.

If a fair comparison is done (ie best season to best season, 2nd best to 2nd best, etc.), Gretzky is decisively ahead.

Yeah, this is obviously accurate. Why so much stock is being put into comparing Lemieux's best or 2nd best season to Gretzky's ~7th best is weird.

Now if someone wants to suggest that Lemieux's best season is better than Gretzky's best - that's fine. 215 isn't necessarily better than 199 in a different season w/different dynamics scoring, you'd have to analyze it closer.
If someone wants to suggest 1993 could have been better still - of course, it's possible.
If someone wants to indulge hypotheticals - you can of course speculate how many more such seasons Lemieux could have achieved if he didn't have the back pains and cancer after 1989.

Even if someone suggests 1989 is better than any Gretzky season (due to adjustments) - Gretzky still wins the peak debate because he did it multiple times. And to be clear - i'm not suggesting 1989 is better than any #99 season, but just that it's worthy exercise to look into. 'Adjusting' stats always gives me trouble, so i don't suggest to know the answer here.

 

[bobholly39]

Agreed. By the time he was 29, Gretzky played in more professional games than Lemieux did in his entire career from age 19 to 40.

As of his 29th birthday, Gretkzy had played in:

• 823 regular season games in the NHL
• 80 regular season games in the WHA (not as good as the NHL, but still a professional league - he was 17 at the start of the season)
• 131 playoff games in the NHL
• 13 playoff games in the WHA
• 24 Canada Cup games

That's 1,071 professional games. Lemieux, in his entire career through age 40, played 915 RS + 107 PO + 9 Canada Cup + 5 Olympic + 6 World Cup games = 1,042 games.

All of this is true (well - i take your word for it, i didn't check your math ) - but it's a bit apples to oranges comparing Gretzky's wear and tear on his body to Lemieux's injuries. Lemieux's back was in horrible shape most of his career. I know Gretzky eventually had back issues too of course.

Is more wear and tear but less injuries better for durability - or is much worst injuries yet less overall games played better for durability? It's a subjective opinion.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Why does @Vegito ignore this post?

oh. Because he knows it’s right.

Then again, what do I expect from someone who thinks Gretzky was washed up at 27

I’m working .

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Why does @Vegito ignore this post?

oh. Because he knows it’s right.

Then again, what do I expect from someone who thinks Gretzky was washed up at 27

You know I was being scarcastic right

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lemieux's 1989 campaign was pretty clearly his best season. He set a career high in goals, assists and points. That's also true if you look at hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points. It was also his 2nd most productive season in goals per game, assists per game, and points per game (behind 1993, but way ahead of any of his other years).

Gretzky's 1989 season was probably his 7th best year, give or take. It was the 7th highest goal total of his career, 8th highest assist total, and 7th highest point total. It ranked 6th, T-6th, and 8th in hockey-reference.com's adjusted goals, assists and points, respectively. On a per-game basis, it was T-6th, 9th, and 8th in goals, assists and points per game, respectively.

So it's true that Lemieux's best season was better than Gretzky's 7th (?) best year. But I'm not sure what the point of this obviously biased comparison is supposed to be.

If a fair comparison is done (ie best season to best season, 2nd best to 2nd best, etc.), Gretzky is decisively ahead.

Which season is Gretzky decisively ahead of lemieuxs 199 (76 gp) season?

 

[Regal]

Except he absolutely wasn't. His PPG fell over the course of the season, and he was below a PPG in the playoffs and .33 GPG despite playing a ridiculous 24:30 per game. In his last 6 games he had 0 goals and 3 assists. It is obvious that he couldn't last 82 games, and if he tried to he would have deteriorated rapidly.

So your fantasy numbers are just that - a fantasy.

The real Lemieux wasn't nearly as good as your fake numbers, was actually the second best player on his own line for one half of one season, and would go on to lead the NHL in precisely nothing after age 31.

Your entire argument is based on a tiny sample of games in the playoffs against two of the best defensive teams and goalies in the league. He didn't slow down at the end of the regular season (14 points in his last 5 games), and was obviously more apt to destroying weaker teams at that point in his career. He certainly wouldn't have been able to continue on his paces, and he was helped by a prime Jagr, but there's no legitimate evidence to suggest he would have deteriorated rapidly

 

[Ciao]

What's the difference between ability and pure ability? Aside from purity, of course. Is it like when people to use literally to add emphasis? The mechanic literally fixed my car.

I dunno, but that's ironic. He literally like fixed mine too. Ironical, man.

 

[Regal]

Which season is Gretzky decisively ahead of lemieuxs 199 (76 gp) season?

He means the overall list is decisively ahead. You can make a case for it being close or maybe for Lemieux for that season, but then Gretzky is decisively ahead as you go down the list because he maintained that level far more consistently

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Which season is Gretzky decisively ahead of lemieuxs 199 (76 gp) season?

Where is Lemieux better than Gretzky?

It’s not records.

It’s not personal hardware.

It’s not team hard ware.

It’s not career totals.

 

[Steven Toast]

Where is Lemieux better than Gretzky?

In @Vegito's head

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

In @Vegito's head

Ah, make believe land. Only possible place. Certainly not in this reality.

 

[AWSAA]

I believe Lemieux's game would translate far better to the modern era. I can't see Wayne winning multiple Rockets in today's game, he'd be lucky to get one.

 

[treple13]

This is going to sound weird, but being the GOAT of your sport seems to make guys overrated. It's true of both Gretzky and Jordan from that era. Are they the best ever? Yes. Are they so far better than everyone else that there's no discussion to be had. Nope.

A healthy Lemieux has a good chance of beating some of Gretzky's major records based on his p/g. Anyone saying "AINEC" to this question which takes durability and longevity out of the question is deluded.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

This is going to sound weird, but being the GOAT of your sport seems to make guys overrated. It's true of both Gretzky and Jordan from that era. Are they the best ever? Yes. Are they so far better than everyone else that there's no discussion to be had. Nope.

A healthy Lemieux has a good chance of beating some of Gretzky's major records based on his p/g. Anyone saying "AINEC" to this question which takes durability and longevity out of the question is deluded.

Compare their respective GP before comparing PPG. Gretzky has played 8+ extra seasons worth of games than Lemieux (regular season + playoffs). Check their stats at the same age, same GP, etc and Gretzky is always miles ahead. If Gretzky retired after ~900 GP his PPG would be through the roof.

End of 90/91 season: 2142pts in 925 GP, 2.32 PPG.

So much for breaking those records. (you can also go by age, 100/200/300/etc GP, Gretzky is always ahead).