Why would Gretzky still dominate today? Here's the secret about Gretzky...

tazzy19

Registered User
Mar 27, 2008
2,268
116
I've been reading a lot of threads about Gretzky, which compells me to post this. People saying he was just a product of his time and the watered down NHL and expansion and his great teammates and the "No Hit Gretzky Rule" conspiracies and the....you name it. So here it goes:

What so many people are missing (the people who say Crosby and Ovi and Malken, etc would score just as many points as him if they played then) is WHY Gretzky was so far ahead, and HOW he did it. The answer is so simple that no one would ever be able to figure it out just watching on TV in real time (without slow motion or replay). It was an ability to simplify the game to the extent that the past, present, and future were all one pattern, and each moment within the game was just a part of the overall pattern. Gretzky would not react just to the present moment (or better put, he was, but the present moment was not just the present moment to him). He was reacting to ALL future possibilities within each moment, to the overall pattern, if that makes any sense.

Ok, ready to finally understand how Gretzky had more assists than anyone else had points? It doesn't seem that amazing unless you really understand it (we all "know" it's because of his vision and hockey sense, but what does that really mean?), so here it is. Gretzky had 5 assists this game, but his most amazing assist does not look the most spectacular, not at all. He has far more beautiful assists (to the eye) during this game in fact. But watch what he does at 1:36:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPMhXNuzcSo&feature=related

Looks like a boring play, right? What's so special, right? You see, if you watched Gretzky on TV, you never really knew what he was doing. So let's break it down: He knew Gilmour was about to get out of the penalty box (on the opposite side of the ice, away from the camera), so instead of dumping the puck into the zone during the penalty kill on a routine 2 on 2 -- LIKE EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD WOULD DO -- he did something we call "genius". They say the most simple things are derived from genius, right? Well, this is an example of that. Instead of dumping the puck into the zone, Gretzky peels back toward the boards and drops the puck for Rochefort, who was trailing the play. Now because Gilmour was about to leave the penalty box (timing was something Gretzky was innately in tune with, and in fact used to count down seconds of the game and penalty time in his head while playing), Gretzky knew Gilmour would have a free shot being the extra player on the ice. Now that 2 on 2 is a 3 on 2 because of something so simple it doesn't even look like anything special in the moment. That moment in which he dropped the puck and created a 3 on 2 looked absolutely normal, because Gretzky caused it to be "normal". But how many players in the world would have decided not to dump that puck in at that moment??? The answer is NO ONE. No one, except for Gretzky. That's why he finished his career with more assists than anyone else has points. Gretzky was able to read the play several steps ahead, all in the present moment, because the future was simply an aspect of the present to him. And he didn't even have to think about it! His brain was simply able to read it and react to it as though he were a part of it -- the cause, as well as the effect.

So yes, Ovi and Lemieux and others may have LOOKED more spectacular, because all we see are the physical plays they make. With Gretzky, hardly anyone actually GOT it (nor did the players he played against, and exploited that). Gretzky simply "normalized" the patterns of the game to his liking. Looked boring, but no one else in history has been able to do it. And he did it every shift, every game, every season, every series, for his entire career. Go figure.

That's why Gretzky in his prime would win the scoring title today, and would dominate while doing so. I can't imagine what he'd do with no two line pass. He'd have a field day.
 
Last edited:

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
People saying he was just a product of his time and the watered down NHL and expansion and his great teammates and the "No Hit Gretzky Rule" conspiracies and the....you name it.

Nobody with any credibility says this.

To post your spiel here in this section is just preaching to the choir.
 

tazzy19

Registered User
Mar 27, 2008
2,268
116
Nobody with any credibility says this.

To post your spiel here in this section is just preaching to the choir.
I also posted it because I was watching Game 2 of the 87 Canada Cup final the other day, and that play never really looked special to me until I realized what Gretzky actually did there. And then it got me thinking about how he did that every shift, and of course that translated into total statistical domination without making it too obvious (numbers aside!). It's almost like he was doing it with mirrors.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,133
6,428
Watching Gretzky his whole career it was clear to me that no one played the game like he did; he indeed made what he did look "normal" almost "easy".

There is no contemporary equivalent. Ovechkin is unpredictable at times, very original on his puck-wielding rushes, but he seems so myopic in comparison to Gretzky, reads what's right in front of him but doesn't make the sort of consistent good judgements about his teammates and the entire ice surface, forces the play more than taking advantage or anticipating opportunities.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Agree with the OP and other posts especially what VanIslander says. I also laugh at the people who suggest Ovechkin would outpoint Gretzky today. And I do agree that one thing Ovechkin lacks is the hockey sense the Great One had. Even Crosby trumps Ovechkin in that category. Ovechkin is more straight ahead. He'll bear down the left wing and cut inside and rifle that hard wrist shot. Hey look, that's dangerous, but it's more flashy than effective.

No one in NHL history was more effective than #99. And that's because he was smarter than anyone who ever played the game. All due respect to Henrik Sedin, but he outpointed Sid and Ovy this year. No way in the world does Gretzky get outpointed by Sedin, or anyone else. In fact he probably still has as many assists as Sedin had points (112). For those of you who think this is impossible think about this. Henrik Sedin had 83 assists. Not bad. But Henrik is not #99. He had a great season but one that is so far a blip compared to the rest of his career. If Sedin racks up 83 assists then why is it so hard for people to believe today that Gretzky would still have 110-120 assists?
 

Maximus Taylor

Registered User
Mar 21, 2008
1,618
0
Where do YOU live?
Notwithstanding seeing the guy actually play the game, one stat that always gets me is that between the age of 19 and 30, only one guy got more points than Gretzky in a season, on two occasions, and it was Le Magnifique himself. If that's not dominance, I don't know what is.

Oh, and the fact that at 37, old man Gretzky led the league in assists.
 

unknown33

Registered User
Dec 8, 2009
3,942
150
Gretzky beeing considered the best player ever proves that the most important thing for a hockey player to have is hockey sense.
 

Reds4Life

Registered User
Dec 24, 2007
3,896
223
Of course he would dominate and be the best player in the league (along with Mario, Orr and Mr.Hockey). Though the gap between him(them) and league's average players would be (much) smaller than it was in his (their) day.
 

Fredrik_71

Registered User
Dec 24, 2007
1,139
28
Sweden
The problem with Gretzky is he wasn't flashy in a Mario kind of way. He played the game simple and supereffective. I dare anyone to give me an example of another player with the same vision for the game as Gretzky! Another thing I personally have experienced is that with an increasing understanding of the game you starting to appreciate the little things Gretzky did on the ice. How he skates into position, seeing his teammates, anticipating the passes, catching the opponents on the wrong foot, etc.

He played the game so effectively it looks to easy. Thats the problem. I have definitely changed my appreciation of Gretzky. I was a big believer of the "no hit Gretzky rule" until I understood why he didn't get hit. The opponents never could set him up for a hit. Its that simple. :)

/Cheers
 

Blades of Glory

Troll Captain
Feb 12, 2006
18,401
6
California
If Gretzky played today, no one else would have a chance at the Art Ross Trophy. His assist numbers alone would out rank all but 2-4 players point totals for the season. Now, would he score 60-90 goals? I would doubt it, but he's Wayne Gretzky.

I'm thinking an average Gretzky year in today's NHL would be 45-110-155. Nobody else in the league would be within 35-40 points of him. Unless a prime Mario Lemieux decided to come back too. I could see him, being healthy, going 60-100-160 with all these new obstruction rules.
 

Raym11

Registered User
Oct 6, 2009
8,172
1,892
he also has to factor in his teammates, sometimes you can "predict" a play is going to happen in your head that you think of, but if your other linemate plays a different style or doesnt have the sense, then you have to adapt.


IMO i always figured Gretzky studied his teammates and opponents and their playing styles, and played the game to them. Using his vision and predictability of others, he was always in the right place at the right time or had someone open to pass to because of this. He could simply predict in a situation if someone would try to hit him, and who was coming at him, and get out of the way or move and throw the opponent off whose trying to hit him. If he's coming down the boards, and someones coming at you who likes to hit and throw hipchecks along the boards, he just altered his movement so the chance of the hit wasnt there anymore. This is what separates him from every other play is the fact other players play the games to themselves and their playing thoughts.


This is purely just speculation, of what ive always figured, his hockey sense and vision was/is second to none and this always just seemed like the logical explanation to me on how he was always in the right place at the right time or always found teammates open.
 

C77

Registered User
Mar 12, 2009
14,610
447
Junior's Farm
It's amazing that in a game when everyone is so good (they're all professionals) that one guy stood above all of them at his position.

The vision of Gretzky is also what makes the best soccer passers. It's beautiful to watch.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Notwithstanding seeing the guy actually play the game, one stat that always gets me is that between the age of 19 and 30, only one guy got more points than Gretzky in a season, on two occasions, and it was Le Magnifique himself. If that's not dominance, I don't know what is.

Oh, and the fact that at 37, old man Gretzky led the league in assists.

And even then the next year ('92) only Kevin Stevens outpointed him along with Lemieux. Then in '93 he was injured. Then in '94 he led the NHL in points. Only once '95 hit and he was 34 years old was he no longer the favourite to lead the NHL in points
 

Crosbyfan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2003
12,633
2,442
It's amazing that in a game when everyone is so good (they're all professionals) that one guy stood above all of them at his position.

The vision of Gretzky is also what makes the best soccer passers. It's beautiful to watch.

It would have been interesting to see how he could have done in soccer, though obviously Gretzky had a number of complementary hockey skills, such as puck control, that allowed his vision to work.

He definitely seemed to have had "more time to think", during the same real, time than average NHL players.
 

Psycho Papa Joe

Porkchop Hoser
Feb 27, 2002
23,347
17
Cesspool, Ontario
Visit site
I have no doubt if Gretzky was in his 20's right now, he'd be winning scoring titles. I don't think he'd be getting 200+ pts though. 130 to 160 pts would seem a reasonable estimate of what he could get. Keep in mind, an over the hill Gretzky, with a really bad back still got 90+ pts in the middle of the dead puck era at the age of 36 and 37 (at 37 he only finished 12pts out of first in the NHL against a peak Jagr).

Ridiculous goaltending equipment, and modern day defensive systems will prevent Gretzky like season from ever happening again unless the NHL does something extremely radical.
 

tfong

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2008
10,402
972
www.instagram.com
Super Mario letting the puck go through his skates during the olympic game against the Americans is an example that Mario had just as good hockey sense and vision as Gretzky.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Super Mario letting the puck go through his skates during the olympic game against the Americans is an example that Mario had just as good hockey sense and vision as Gretzky.

It's always appeared that way to me too. Also his no look pass to Kariya was just sickening. When you think about it though, if he really did have equal vision and hockey sense, then that combined with his blatantly obvious edge in physical abilities should have allowed him to produce points at a higher rate than Gretzky, and dominate his peers more during his healthy/almost full seasons, but he didn't.
 

ForsbergForever

Registered User
May 19, 2004
3,319
2,023
It's always appeared that way to me too. Also his no look pass to Kariya was just sickening. When you think about it though, if he really did have equal vision and hockey sense, then that combined with his blatantly obvious edge in physical abilities should have allowed him to produce points at a higher rate than Gretzky, and dominate his peers more during his healthy/almost full seasons, but he didn't.

Yeah, 199 pts in 76 games, 160 pts in 60 games and 161 pts in 70 games really doesn't cut it as far as domination...You have to figure though, that even during his "healthy" periods he was still not in top form due to restrictions on his training and constant rehab from injury preventing him from ever being in "mid-season form".
 

Hawkey Town 18

Registered User
Jun 29, 2009
8,244
1,631
Chicago, IL
Yeah, 199 pts in 76 games, 160 pts in 60 games and 161 pts in 70 games really doesn't cut it as far as domination...You have to figure though, that even during his "healthy" periods he was still not in top form due to restrictions on his training and constant rehab from injury preventing him from ever being in "mid-season form".

He did not say Lemieux didn't dominate, he said he didn't dominate as much as Gretzky, which is far from an insult.
 

tfong

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2008
10,402
972
www.instagram.com
He did not say Lemieux didn't dominate, he said he didn't dominate as much as Gretzky, which is far from an insult.

Though I would say they both had different styles of domination. while the statistics prove that Gretzky is the best hockey player "ever", I still believe the gap between Lemieux and Gretzky is a mere hairline. Lemieux additionally had the ability to dominate people physically.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Though I would say they both had different styles of domination. while the statistics prove that Gretzky is the best hockey player "ever", I still believe the gap between Lemieux and Gretzky is a mere hairline. Lemieux additionally had the ability to dominate people physically.

Since Lemieux was much more physically dominant than Gretzky, yet fell behind him in overall domination (even by a hair), it shows that Gretzky was that much more mentally dominant, no?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->