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

[King Forsberg]

When people way Gretzky would barely outscore Malkin or Crosby they are simply delsusional.

 

[Irato99]

212 pts seemed pretty unlikely until Wayne did it. By the time he hit 215, or Mario hit 199, I think people had forgotten just what an astonishing accomplishment those numbers really were. His 163 assists is more POINTS than any other player has ever scored besides Lemieux. I think he could get at least 150 in today's league. Especially if he grew up in today's environment with modern training, nutrition, etc.

That's what I was going to say... Gretzky's whole career was unlikely.

When he recorded his four 200+ pts seasons, to closest another player came was HoFamer Bossy with 147 pts, and that was his best season by a good margin.

So to say that it's unlikely that Gretzky would leave the best of today in the dust far behind is a bit silly considering he did it for many years before.

 

[revolverjgw]

That's what I was going to say... Gretzky's whole career was unlikely.

When he recorded his four 200+ pts seasons, to closest another player came was HoFamer Bossy with 147 pts, and that was his best season by a good margin.

So to say that it's unlikely that Gretzky would leave the best of today in the dust far behind is a bit silly considering he did it for many years before.

I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.

And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.

He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.

 

[Irato99]

I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.

I don't see why the fact that there are Russians now would change anything, none of them really separated themselves from anybody else, whatever nationality they are.

If you take away Gretzky's first 6 Art Ross, you get 6 different winners and none would have won by more than 10 pts, it's not that different than today, except Gretzky was on another planet.

 

[KaraLupin]

Let me ask you this, if you put Crosby or Malkin in the days of Gretzky (which means subpar diets, training, etc.) How would they fare? What player back then would they most likely be like? Someone like Crosby, who is a student of the game, doesn't have the tools an resources like massive video footage archives, world trainers specified for hockey, dietary awareness, the internet information even. I believe these are a big part of why he is such a great player.

If you give all this to Gretzky, was he the kind of guy that would use this? Or just get by with the God-like talent he was born with?

 

[tazzy19]

I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.

And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.

He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.

Take away Gretzky from the 1980s, and you'll see a different winner every year until Mario comes along. There were guys like Bossy and Yzerman who DID explode for huge years, but they couldn't beat those two guys. It's no different in that respect. Add Gretzky to the mix now, and the same thing happens. Gretzky beats all of them. Nobody won the Art Ross Trophy besides Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jagr from 1981-2001. That's 20 years. Take those guys away, and you have a different winner every single year -- just like today!

 

[ot92s]

if they let gretz go like they did when he was young he would approach 200 points, def crack 170.

his saucer pass is still the most unstoppable thing i have ever seen in any sport. it simple couldn't and could never be nullified. he was so good at it nobody even tries to play like him yet. he is STILL ahead of his time. 30+ years and the game still hasn't caught up to his tactics or strategies...

he also could log way more effective minutes than anyone in today's league. i'm talking 30-35 min per game. so he'd have the equivalent of, like, a 100 game season to everyone else's 80 or so games. if a coach had a clue they'd let him do it.

and holy **** guys, todays equipment....night and day. he would go OFF with today's lighter sticks and skates.

 

[2-4 Slashin]

He would still have his talent and drive plus he'd have the conditioning, core strength, speed and flexibility that todays players have. You can't take his God given talent out of the what if questions.
He may not be light years ahead of everyone else today, but he would still be considerably ahead of the pack. He was a generational talent and he played injured more than many posters seem to recall.


Slashin

 

[Czech Your Math]

Let me ask you this, if you put Crosby or Malkin in the days of Gretzky (which means subpar diets, training, etc.) How would they fare? What player back then would they most likely be like? Someone like Crosby, who is a student of the game, doesn't have the tools an resources like massive video footage archives, world trainers specified for hockey, dietary awareness, the internet information even. I believe these are a big part of why he is such a great player.

If you give all this to Gretzky, was he the kind of guy that would use this? Or just get by with the God-like talent he was born with?

At their peaks, I'm guessing Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin would be at least as good in terms of point production as anyone besides Gretzky. So that would by Yzerman, Bossy, Stastny, Savard, Hawerchuk, guys like that.

One can't say whether Gretzky would use all of the tools available, but I don't see why he wouldn't. He didn't need optical tracking with computer simulations of probably puck location, he just used a pencil, paper and his brain. If someone got by purely on talent, it might have been Lemieux more than Gretzky.

 

[shazariahl]

I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.

And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.

He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.

I don't see what difference the soviets would have made either, had they played in the NHL. He faced them in 4 Canada Cups, and led all 4 in scoring. While the soviets TEAMS were as good as the Canadian ones, there was no individual Rusian player who would have threatened Gretzky's dominance. Maybe he would have won scoring titles by 60 instead of 70? That's about the biggest difference I can see.

 

[#66]

212 pts seemed pretty unlikely until Wayne did it. By the time he hit 215, or Mario hit 199, I think people had forgotten just what an astonishing accomplishment those numbers really were. His 163 assists is more POINTS than any other player has ever scored besides Lemieux. I think he could get at least 150 in today's league. Especially if he grew up in today's environment with modern training, nutrition, etc.

Perfect place for me to get a question out... Do you think a player like Gretz would be allowed to play his game in todays NHL? I'm not so much singling out him as much as saying the offensive first player would be nipped in the bud by some lame coach even as early as peewee.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I don't see what difference the soviets would have made either, had they played in the NHL. He faced them in 4 Canada Cups, and led all 4 in scoring. While the soviets TEAMS were as good as the Canadian ones, there was no individual Rusian player who would have threatened Gretzky's dominance. Maybe he would have won scoring titles by 60 instead of 70? That's about the biggest difference I can see.

Yeah, it makes no difference. The only Euro trained player that has even come close to Gretzky offensively on a regular basis was Jagr and even then it was to a post-30 Gretzky. Not even close to a pre-30 Gretz.

A lot of time with Wayne, people only look at his age when he started to look human while forgetting that even though he was only 33 when he won his last Art Ross, it was already his 16th professional season. He played his first season at only 17.
He had averaged 90 professional games per season up till that point not even including Canada/World Cups.

So while he didn't play into his 40's like some recent players such as Jagr or Lidstrom, he still played more seasons than either of them, 21.
What's more...only in his final season did he fail to produce at a point per game or better.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.

And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.

He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.

I'll add that goaltending is alot different today than in the 80's as well. People need to give their head a shake and go back and look at save % in the 80's compared to the last decade.

40 and 50 goal scores were a dime a dozen in the 80's and in the last 6 years there have been exactly 12 guys 50 plus and only 44 over 40.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

There isn't a lack of talent or skills in goal scoring, it's become alot freaking harder to score.

Let's look at the save % now.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

During the last 6 years it has averaged at about .910 and in the 80's that we have figures for it's around .880 or so.

All teams are just so much better prepared to stop players from scoring.

My comments about Wayne's scoring were respectful, I consider him to be the best player of all time. At the same time the league is extremely competitive and has changed, why is this so hard for people to see?

 

[revolverjgw]

I don't see what difference the soviets would have made either, had they played in the NHL. He faced them in 4 Canada Cups, and led all 4 in scoring. While the soviets TEAMS were as good as the Canadian ones, there was no individual Rusian player who would have threatened Gretzky's dominance. Maybe he would have won scoring titles by 60 instead of 70? That's about the biggest difference I can see.

I'm more concerned about today's hockey landscape. It's bigger, it's more evolved, and all the best guys have the NHL as the goal. The Green Unit was great and maybe Makarov could have become a super elite NHL scorer if he had the opportunity and inclination, but he didn't. Malkin and Ovechkin did and they've won 3 Art Rosses between them. And there's no way you can tell me non-Oiler scoring runner ups like Stastny, Goulet, and Hawerchuk were as good as they are (or as good as Crosby). They just weren't.

Going back a bit, but still in a environment impossible in the 80s, we had Jagr winning 5 Art Rosses and if he had played back then I have little doubt he would have been second to Gretzky every year well clear of everybody else. Another Jagr could come over at any time, maybe Malkin is ready to establish himself as that right now. The last few years alone saw two Swedes win two Art Rosses and some MVPs. Kent Nilsson had some flashes, but you generally didn't see Swedes click with the NA game like they do now.

In any given year, there are so many more guys that are elite high-end and can have a massive year, making it harder for the leaders to stand out. And the high-end North American players aren't any less great than they were in the 80s, though some people might be fooled into thinking otherwise when looking at the scoring charts and seeing less NA names there.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think a modernized Gretzky would be in any danger of losing his scoring titles, to a Makarov or a Jagr or a Malkin or anybody else... I'm just saying the cartoonish statistical dominance wouldn't be there now. Too much competition and too many other factors working against it.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I'll add that goaltending is alot different today than in the 80's as well. People need to give their head a shake and go back and look at save % in the 80's compared to the last decade.

40 and 50 goal scores were a dime a dozen in the 80's and in the last 6 years there have been exactly 12 guys 50 plus and only 44 over 40.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

There isn't a lack of talent or skills in goal scoring, it's become alot freaking harder to score.

Let's look at the save % now.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

During the last 6 years it has averaged at about .910 and in the 80's that we have figures for it's around .880 or so.

All teams are just so much better prepared to stop players from scoring.

My comments about Wayne's scoring were respectful, I consider him to be the best player of all time. At the same time the league is extremely competitive and has changed, why is this so hard for people to see?

Who cares! We're not talking about the average star here, we're talking about the Gretzky and Lemieux level players, outliers.
Lemeiux 00/01 35 goals in just 43 games.
There's a big difference between these "dime a dozen" 50 goal scorers that only did it once with the names changing every year and the guys like Gretzky, Bossy and Lemieux who did it EVERY year! And far exceeded 50 goals to boot!
Gretzky would need to lose a whopping 35-40 freakin goals just to be in the same class as your "dime a dozen" for **** sakes!

The only person having trouble seeing is you.
I don't care how much tighter or supposedly more competitive the league is now, you are NOT knocking a prime Gretzky down 25-35 goals and 70-80 points a season.
That's just freakin ridiculous!

A 36 year old Gretzky in his 19th freakin season in the dead puck era was still a 100 point scorer.
Enough already, give us all a break with this crap, please!


Oh and you know what your save % numbers say? Roughly that goalies were allowing just under an extra goal a game (averaging 30 shots a game, that's 30 goals per 33 games) . That's it!
For this stat to have any noticeable relevance to Gretzky, it would mean that the majority of those extra goals were only from Gretzky...don't make me laugh and good luck proving that one LOL!

 

[Rhiessan71]

Here's one for ya...

Gretzky's Adjusted 97/98 total is 103 points. Even unadjusted, he was tied for 4th only behind Selanne and Kariya in Anaheim and Mario freakin Lemieux that year.

So Gretz at 37 years old would of finished second in league scoring, a mere 6 points behind the Art Ross winner last year.
Then you actually have the audacity to suggest that a 25 year old prime Gretzky would have more trouble separating himself from the rest of the pack today?!?

How many more examples of this stuff do you need before you understand how silly you sound?

 

[Czech Your Math]

A lot of time with Wayne, people only look at his age when he started to look human while forgetting that even though he was only 33 when he won his last Art Ross, it was already his 16th professional season. He played his first season at only 17.
He had averaged 90 professional games per season up till that point not even including Canada/World Cups.

So while he didn't play into his 40's like some recent players such as Jagr or Lidstrom, he still played more seasons than either of them, 21.
What's more...only in his final season did he fail to produce at a point per game or better.

I'm probably being too nitpicky here, but just wanted to point out that:

- Gretzky played 1 WHA season, then 20 NHL seasons
- Lidstrom played 3 seasons in Sweden, then 20 NHL seasons, and did not play anywhere during the most recent lockout
- Jagr has played 19 NHL seasons, 5 seasons in the KHL/Czech leagues, and will likely play at least one more season somewhere (which depends on whether there's an NHL season in '12-13)

So Lidstrom played the same number of NHL seasons as Gretzky and 2 more prof. seasons than him. Jagr has already played 3 more prof. seasons than Gretzky did, although 1 less NHL season due primarily to conditions that Gretzky did not face:

- a canceled NHL season in '04-05
- a CBA that makes it riskier for teams to offer longer contracts to players 35+

Although the WHA in '79 was of higher quality than the KHL in recent years, there was no professional hockey league of higher quality than either of them at those respective times AFAIK. Gretzky could not play in the NHL before '80 due to age, as Jagr couldn't when he played in the Czech league in '90. Jagr obviously could not play in the NHL in '05, since there was no season. He apparently couldn't receive a 2+ year NHL contract starting in '09, due to his age and teams being either too close to the cap or not willing to risk a 2+ year contract for a 35+ y/o player. It's hard to fault a player for going to the KHL, when there was no NHL season in '05, the rules effectively discriminated against his age group, and he could get a longer contract that effectively paid him more.

 

[Hardyvan123]

At their peaks, I'm guessing Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin would be at least as good in terms of point production as anyone besides Gretzky. So that would by Yzerman, Bossy, Stastny, Savard, Hawerchuk, guys like that.

One can't say whether Gretzky would use all of the tools available, but I don't see why he wouldn't. He didn't need optical tracking with computer simulations of probably puck location, he just used a pencil, paper and his brain. If someone got by purely on talent, it might have been Lemieux more than Gretzky.

This is true, people often forget that Wayne's drive, focus and game preparation allowed him to exploit his talent, especially in the early 80's. they also seem to forget on how poor defenses were run and equipped from top to bottom in the league in the 80's as well. there wouldn't be 3 teams in his division with the D of Vancouver, LA and Winnipeg either.

If Lemieux had the health, focus and drive that Wayne had he very well could be in the mix for the best player ever IMO.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I'm probably being too nitpicky here, but just wanted to point out that:

- Gretzky played 1 WHA season, then 20 NHL seasons
- Lidstrom played 20 NHL seasons and did not play during the most recent lockout
- Jagr has played 19 NHL seasons, 4 seasons in the KHL/Czech leagues, and will likely play at least one more season somewhere (which depends on whether there's an NHL season in '12-13)

So while it's technically correct to say Gretzky played more prof. seasons than Lidstrom, it's more of a wash. Jagr has already played 2 more prof. seasons than Gretzky has, although 1 less NHL season due primarily to conditions that Gretzky did not face:

- a canceled NHL season in '04-05
- a CBA that makes it riskier for teams to offer longer contracts to players 35+

Although the WHA in '79 was of higher quality than the KHL in recent years, there was no professional hockey league of higher quality than either of them at those respective times AFAIK. Gretzky could not play in the NHL before '80 due to age. Jagr obviously could not play in the NHL in '05, since there was no season. He apparently couldn't receive a 2+ year NHL contract starting in '09, due to his age and teams being either too close to the cap or not willing to risk a 2+ year contract for a 35+ y/o player. It's hard to fault a player for going to the KHL, when there was no NHL season in '05, the rules effectively discriminated against his age group, and he could get a longer contract that effectively paid him more.

Right but my point was more about how much more hockey Wayne had played than either of those two by the age of 35 and was already in his 21rst season by age 38.

Age 35:
Gretzky 18th season
Jagr 16th season
Lidstrom 13th season (would of been his 14th without the lockout)

 

[Czech Your Math]

Right but my point was more about how much more hockey Wayne had played than either of those two by the age of 35 and was already in his 21rst season by age 38.

Age 35:
Gretzky 18th season
Jagr 16th season
Lidstrom 13th season (would of been his 14th without the lockout)

Well, I already pointed out the reasons Jagr wasn't in the NHL during various seasons. He played one year in the top Czech league at age 17-18, just as Gretzky played one year in the WHA at age 17-18. Realize that Jagr started playing Jrs. at age 12-13, and took a lot more punishment than Gretzky during their respective NHL days. So I'm not sure if that's the best comparison to use. Before the '96 season when Gretzky turned 35 in Jan. and before the '07 season when Jagr turned 35 in Feb.:

Gretzky
1,093 NHL
180 NHL PO
80 WHA
13 WHA PO
TOTAL: 1,366

Jagr
1,109 NHL
149 NHL PO
70 Czech
32 KHL
20 Czech/KHL PO
TOTAL: 1,380

Jagr played more international games as well upto that point. As you said, Gretzky won his last Ross at age 33-34, while Jagr lost one by a nose at age 33-34 in one of the crazier races (Olympic year, winner traded and had two more games available).

 

[nuck]

I'll add that goaltending is alot different today than in the 80's as well. People need to give their head a shake and go back and look at save % in the 80's compared to the last decade.

40 and 50 goal scores were a dime a dozen in the 80's and in the last 6 years there have been exactly 12 guys 50 plus and only 44 over 40.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

There isn't a lack of talent or skills in goal scoring, it's become alot freaking harder to score.

Let's look at the save % now.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

During the last 6 years it has averaged at about .910 and in the 80's that we have figures for it's around .880 or so.

All teams are just so much better prepared to stop players from scoring.

My comments about Wayne's scoring were respectful, I consider him to be the best player of all time. At the same time the league is extremely competitive and has changed, why is this so hard for people to see?

The game changes and evolves but not to the extent some people suggest. The two highest scorers post lockout have been Thornton and an aging Jagr. Jagr was not close to a healthy Lemieux in their youth, and Mario head to head was not better than Gretz although close. Before theire respective medical issues began to erode their games there is a clear separation between 99/66 and everyone else. Jagr's performance with the Rangers, with plugs for linemates, doesn't support that post lockout players have consistenly had it that much differently unless you are keying on 2010-11. If we are saying nobody would get close to 200pts in 2010-2011 I think few would argue (same as 2000-2001), but I am pretty certain that in any year a 24 year old Gretzky would still be 40% ahead of the next player not named Mario.

What some people seem to be ignoring too is the injuries that Crosby has had. I don't consider his production to be "generational" since he started getting hurt and that has skewed the numbers. If he wins a scoring championship at age 19 is it likely that is his peak? Without the groin and ankle problems, and then the concussions, it is reasonable to assume he would have progressed since that 120 point season. Granted 06-07 was a soft year for defense based on the number of players who had personal scoring explosions, but a 19 year old scoring champ should be winning it every year.

In an environment where Henrik Sedin could score 114 points, Crosby should have done way more than 109pts, and at that time I was pretty certain he was playing with nagging medical issues. My point is that the guy should have had seasons of 150pts+, and if that had happened folks would not be trying to explain the lack of a runaway scoring leader today on some change in the level of difficulty when what it really meant was that the truly generational talent Orr, Gretz, Mario, Lindros, ____ was currently MIA due to injuries. I personally think Sid will never get back to his pre-injury level of play, but if he should manage to put it all together in one healthy career year, he would show why he belongs in the generation group. I think uninjured Sid could have been 140+pts last season and Gretzky maybe 160ish.
I tend to think todays training extends careers (Sakic, Selanne, Lid) and allows some lesser lights to leapfrog a few of their betters but there has been no changes in headfakes and blind passes that would significantly alter the success of the most offensively creative players.

 

[211*]

The game changes and evolves but not to the extent some people suggest. The two highest scorers post lockout have been Thornton and an aging Jagr. Jagr was not close to a healthy Lemieux in their youth, and Mario head to head was not better than Gretz although close. Before theire respective medical issues began to erode their games there is a clear separation between 99/66 and everyone else. Jagr's performance with the Rangers, with plugs for linemates, doesn't support that post lockout players have consistenly had it that much differently unless you are keying on 2010-11. If we are saying nobody would get close to 200pts in 2010-2011 I think few would argue (same as 2000-2001), but I am pretty certain that in any year a 24 year old Gretzky would still be 40% ahead of the next player not named Mario.

What some people seem to be ignoring too is the injuries that Crosby has had. I don't consider his production to be "generational" since he started getting hurt and that has skewed the numbers. If he wins a scoring championship at age 19 is it likely that is his peak? Without the groin and ankle problems, and then the concussions, it is reasonable to assume he would have progressed since that 120 point season. Granted 06-07 was a soft year for defense based on the number of players who had personal scoring explosions, but a 19 year old scoring champ should be winning it every year.

In an environment where Henrik Sedin could score 114 points, Crosby should have done way more than 109pts, and at that time I was pretty certain he was playing with nagging medical issues. My point is that the guy should have had seasons of 150pts+, and if that had happened folks would not be trying to explain the lack of a runaway scoring leader today on some change in the level of difficulty when what it really meant was that the truly generational talent Orr, Gretz, Mario, Lindros, ____ was currently MIA due to injuries. I personally think Sid will never get back to his pre-injury level of play, but if he should manage to put it all together in one healthy career year, he would show why he belongs in the generation group. I think uninjured Sid could have been 140+pts last season and Gretzky maybe 160ish.
I tend to think todays training extends careers (Sakic, Selanne, Lid) and allows some lesser lights to leapfrog a few of their betters but there has been no changes in headfakes and blind passes that would significantly alter the success of the most offensively creative players.

the 05-06 06-07 years were reminiscent of 90s hockey, just way too many scoring chances. i dont think those two years should even count for this era because they dont even seem to be from this era when you look back.

 

[Rhiessan71]

The game changes and evolves but not to the extent some people suggest. The two highest scorers post lockout have been Thornton and an aging Jagr. Jagr was not close to a healthy Lemieux in their youth, and Mario head to head was not better than Gretz although close. Before theire respective medical issues began to erode their games there is a clear separation between 99/66 and everyone else. Jagr's performance with the Rangers, with plugs for linemates, doesn't support that post lockout players have consistenly had it that much differently unless you are keying on 2010-11. If we are saying nobody would get close to 200pts in 2010-2011 I think few would argue (same as 2000-2001), but I am pretty certain that in any year a 24 year old Gretzky would still be 40% ahead of the next player not named Mario.

What some people seem to be ignoring too is the injuries that Crosby has had. I don't consider his production to be "generational" since he started getting hurt and that has skewed the numbers. If he wins a scoring championship at age 19 is it likely that is his peak? Without the groin and ankle problems, and then the concussions, it is reasonable to assume he would have progressed since that 120 point season. Granted 06-07 was a soft year for defense based on the number of players who had personal scoring explosions, but a 19 year old scoring champ should be winning it every year.

In an environment where Henrik Sedin could score 114 points, Crosby should have done way more than 109pts, and at that time I was pretty certain he was playing with nagging medical issues. My point is that the guy should have had seasons of 150pts+, and if that had happened folks would not be trying to explain the lack of a runaway scoring leader today on some change in the level of difficulty when what it really meant was that the truly generational talent Orr, Gretz, Mario, Lindros, ____ was currently MIA due to injuries. I personally think Sid will never get back to his pre-injury level of play, but if he should manage to put it all together in one healthy career year, he would show why he belongs in the generation group. I think uninjured Sid could have been 140+pts last season and Gretzky maybe 160ish.
I tend to think todays training extends careers (Sakic, Selanne, Lid) and allows some lesser lights to leapfrog a few of their betters but there has been no changes in headfakes and blind passes that would significantly alter the success of the most offensively creative players.

I agree with you that Sid, without the injuries would of been better than what he has been been and possibly he could of been in the 130-140 range.
Where you lose me is when you say Crosby at 140 and Gretzky at only 160.
I'm sorry but if Crosby manages 140, then Gretzky is easily topping 180.
The gap between the two offensively is a hell of a lot more than you're allowing for.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Well, I already pointed out the reasons Jagr wasn't in the NHL during various seasons. He played one year in the top Czech league at age 17-18, just as Gretzky played one year in the WHA at age 17-18. Realize that Jagr started playing Jrs. at age 12-13, and took a lot more punishment than Gretzky during their respective NHL days. So I'm not sure if that's the best comparison to use. Before the '96 season when Gretzky turned 35 in Jan. and before the '07 season when Jagr turned 35 in Feb.:

Gretzky
1,093 NHL
180 NHL PO
80 WHA
13 WHA PO
TOTAL: 1,366

Jagr
1,109 NHL
149 NHL PO
70 Czech
32 KHL
20 Czech/KHL PO
TOTAL: 1,380

Jagr played more international games as well upto that point. As you said, Gretzky won his last Ross at age 33-34, while Jagr lost one by a nose at age 33-34 in one of the crazier races (Olympic year, winner traded and had two more games available).

I'm sorry but you're not honestly considering the seriously reduced travel times and lax 50 or so game scheds of the KHL and Czech league's the same as the 80 game scheds of the WHA and NHL are you....honestly?
Not to mention that Gretzky played all his games up to that point on a grueling West coast schedule.
C'mon man, Gretzky had at least 100-150 more NHL level games and easily triple the travel hours on Jagr by age 35.

It's not even close.
Gretzky was playing a full NHL sched at age 17, Jagr wasn't doing that kind of workload until he was 19. There's really no getting around that.

 

[Czech Your Math]

I'm sorry but you're not honestly considering the seriously reduced travel times and lax 50 or so game scheds of the KHL and Czech league's the same as the 80 game scheds of the WHA and NHL are you....honestly?
Not to mention that Gretzky played all his games up to that point on a grueling West coast schedule.
C'mon man, Gretzky had at least 100-150 more NHL level games and easily triple the travel hours on Jagr by age 35.

It's not even close.
Gretzky was playing a full NHL sched at age 17, Jagr wasn't doing that kind of workload until he was 19. There's really no getting around that.

Gretzky played ~1% more NHL games (incl. playoffs) to that point, only because of the canceled lockout season... and you say "AINEC"?

I didn't know we were taking travel into account, my sweet lord.

I thought we were talking about actual hockey played. And no, I don't think the '79 WHA was that much different from the KHL/Czech leagues, esp. considering that was much less than 10% of each player's games to that point.

If you want to take other factors into account and tally up wear and tear, maybe start with Gretzky rarely being hit and Jagr playing a possession game and digging pucks out of the corners while (as Shanahan said in '07) "Jagr takes more abuse than any player I've seen." The amount of abuse he took and the rules enforcement in 2007 was nothing like it was in Jagr's prime, and no one would pretend otherwise.

Jagr was 18 when he started his first NHL season, less than one year older than Gretzky in his first NHL season. He was 17 when he played in the top Czech league. Was he supposed to fly around the world to try to play in the last season of the WHA? Seriously? When he started playing Jrs. he was 12 and playing against players 5-6 years older than him.

Let's be reality here.