Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky? Will we know it?

[Big Phil]

This comment is so ridiculous, i was going to skip it but how many players not as good as the Sedins had 2 or more seasons better than Mario? The question has no worth because we are talking about guys being injured.

Also if you really think that what Crosby did in 10 with that supporting cast at the age of 22 wasn't more impressive than what Hank did then you really need to give your head a shake.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/PIT/2010.html

Aside form some PP time with Malkin, Sid's supporting cast has been Dionne like in it's lack of star power historically.

Heck Sid is only 25 and has a long career ahead of him but I would bet most people would say he is the better player of the 2.

No doubt people would have wanted Crosby on their team over Henrik. I don't think that's what he meant at all. I think it is more along the lines of a player like Gretzky would have still destroyed Sedin in 2010 points wise. He did this to even better players, so why not Sedin?

Also, I have to ask who are the players not as good as Sedin that had two or more seasons better than Mario? A healthy Mario, just like a healthy Gretzky in his prime wouldn't and didn't lose the scoring title to players of Sedin's level. When Mario was injured, yes, then he lost those scoring titles. But I think the point is a healthy Sid got beat outright in 2010 by Sedin.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

There are a keys to challenge if any player is better than Gretzky in terms of numbers and talent

First.. Player size, players in the 80s goaltenders included were smaller, weighed less and were smaller equipment wise as well, you see goaltenders with no mask, pads that were no bigger than phone books strapped to your shins.

Secondly - The 90s for Gretzky - his point totals tapered off tremendously, suggesting either a) he was finished or b) the league was developing better players and goalies to keep up with Wayne ... I'll take option b) ( see Patrick Roy, pavel bure, Eric lindros, Sakic etc)

Lastly - quality of product... Realistically the NHL in the 70s-80s didn't have the quality of players across the board, almost every 3rd liner these days can skate fluently and check ferociously, shoot the puck like a bullet out of a gun. Back in those days harder to find

The nuge

The last goalie to play without a mask was Andy Brown in 1974.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Well it's easy to pinpoint to try to make a point, I can show you clips on youtube with Orr caught out of position in the offensive zone leading to a breakaway goal, does it mean he didn't know how to play defense... And by the way Gretzky leads career +/- for a forward...

One play is not the same as one season.

Gretzky's great +/- is attributed to him playing for the greatest offensive team (and perhaps the best team period) in hockey history. He was 27 when he went to LA and despite the fact that he was still easliy the best offensive player in game, he was a minus player over the rest of his career.

Hopefully you are not disputing the fact that Gretzky didn't play much defense?

 

[Big Phil]

One play is not the same as one season.

Gretzky's great +/- is attributed to him playing for the greatest offensive team (and perhaps the best team period) in hockey history. He was 27 when he went to LA and despite the fact that he was still easliy the best offensive player in game, he was a minus player over the rest of his career.

Hopefully you are not disputing the fact that Gretzky didn't play much defense?

I think a lot of that had to do with him being on lousy teams at the end of his career. The Rangers and then the Kings both had some lousy years when he was there. Gretzky didn't have a season where he was a minus player until 1991-'92. Anyway you slice it that's pretty impressive to go 13 years before that happens. Then the Kings had some awful years and the last couple years for the Rangers were woeful.

So basically it looks like this:

From 1979-'91 he was + 604
From 1991-'99 he was -86

I'm not a huge fan of the plus minus stat, it's nice and all but is far from telling the story of a player. The 1994 Kings were 3rd last in goals against. Gretzky was -25, Kurri -24 and Robitaille -20. We all know Kurri was a strong defensive player so did he not play defense as well? This was just a bad team that unravelled and despite winning the Art Ross this wasn't a Gretzky player who could carry a team on his back like he used to (which we all know the condition his back was in at that time). One thing I remember when he retired is that he constantly said he couldn't play the game the way he could 10 years ago. I don't know why people are so dumbfounded when even the greatest player to ever live can't play the way he used to.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I'd argue that Lemieux was better. Not a better career but a better player. Anyways I'm sure that this has been debated to death so...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think a lot of that had to do with him being on lousy teams at the end of his career. The Rangers and then the Kings both had some lousy years when he was there. Gretzky didn't have a season where he was a minus player until 1991-'92. Anyway you slice it that's pretty impressive to go 13 years before that happens. Then the Kings had some awful years and the last couple years for the Rangers were woeful.

So basically it looks like this:

From 1979-'91 he was + 604
From 1991-'99 he was -86

I'm not a huge fan of the plus minus stat, it's nice and all but is far from telling the story of a player. The 1994 Kings were 3rd last in goals against. Gretzky was -25, Kurri -24 and Robitaille -20. We all know Kurri was a strong defensive player so did he not play defense as well? This was just a bad team that unravelled and despite winning the Art Ross this wasn't a Gretzky player who could carry a team on his back like he used to (which we all know the condition his back was in at that time). One thing I remember when he retired is that he constantly said he couldn't play the game the way he could 10 years ago. I don't know why people are so dumbfounded when even the greatest player to ever live can't play the way he used to.

I agree, the +/- stat is far from perfect.

But still, no Art Ross Trophy winner ever came close to a -25.

Since 67-68, Mikita with a -3 is the only other minus ART winner.

Third worst is a +8 for Gretzky, then a +10 for Mario (in 1996) and Crosby (in 2007, who was 19 that year).

 

[Big Phil]

I agree, the +/- stat is far from perfect.

But still, no Art Ross Trophy winner ever came close to a -25.

Since 67-68, Mikita with a -3 is the only other minus ART winner.

Third worst is a +8 for Gretzky, then a +10 for Mario (in 1996) and Crosby (in 2007, who was 19 that year).

Alright, but the guy still had 130 points on a terrible team, led the league and was a 2nd team all-star at center. I honestly don't know what happened to the Kings in 1993-'94 but they were a terrible defensive team and Hrudey had an awful year. I'm not sure what you are trying to say with this season. This was a time when Gretzky was noticeably on a decline and he still led the NHL in points. I don't think it is any indication of the player he once was.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Alright, but the guy still had 130 points on a terrible team, led the league and was a 2nd team all-star at center. I honestly don't know what happened to the Kings in 1993-'94 but they were a terrible defensive team and Hrudey had an awful year. I'm not sure what you are trying to say with this season. This was a time when Gretzky was noticeably on a decline and he still led the NHL in points. I don't think it is any indication of the player he once was.

Just trying to say he didn't play much defense. That's all.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Just trying to say he didn't play much defense. That's all.

Gretzky simply did not play defense. He would sit at the blueline waiting for a pass to go the other way.

And it didn't matter because even in his team's defensive end he'd STILL have a guy shadowing him.

 

[Fred Taylor]

It's so unlikely to me that anyone will ever match Gretzkys career and dominance over his peers. I would bet that he stays ranked number 1 forever.

 

[MadLuke]

It's so unlikely to me that anyone will ever match Gretzkys career and dominance over his peers. I would bet that he stays ranked number 1 forever.

Depends if the nhl stay about the same for another 100-200 year's.

If a new market of player's arrive or not, if black people start to massively play hockey for an example, could easily see someone as good as gretzky getting in the nhl in a 100 year's windows.

But would need luck, dedication, etc... to maintain that kind of dominance for a decade long as Gretzky did.

Greztky with more luck (no injury), less internation play and staying with the OIlers could have made significanly more points and dominance that the current real-world gretzky did, let say 2-3 more 130 points season (and one 150-160 points season).

Also peek Mario Lemieux was near Gretzky in term of dominance, making the scenario of a heatly and more dedicated Mario Lemieux not that strange.

 

[Jesus Vitale]

As long as hockey exists, it'll happen eventually. I'm sure no one thought that anyone could ever be considered better than Wilt Chamberlain who scored 100 points in a game, and then Michael Jordan came along. People probably thought Babe Ruth would be the undisputed #1 forever in baseball, and then there was Willie Mays and then Barry Bonds. for the NFL it's a little harder because it's hard to compare positions but there was Jim Brown who was ridiculously dominate, and then Jerry Rice.

his records may never be broken and he might never be supplanted as THE best of all time, but multiple players will be ONE day be considered in the same neighborhood.

 

[Rhiessan71]

When Mario was injured, yes, then he lost those scoring titles.

Heh, even injured, missing 1/4 of the season, he still won it with 160 points in just 60 games.
Hell even Jagr did close to the same in 2000 only playing 63 games.

But I think the point is a healthy Sid got beat outright in 2010 by Sedin.

That was EXACTLY my point.
For Sid to truly be counted among that next tier of superstar (lets call it the Jagr level) he needs to bury these guys at some point.
Not just edge them out.

What he needs is to stay healthy AND put in a few FULL seasons like 2010 in.

When Gretz, Mario and even Jagr in their primes, stayed healthy and played a full season they were guaranteed to not just take home the Art Ross, they did so by healthy amounts.
Sid, except for half a season in 2010 has NEVER shown THAT level of dominance yet.

 

[Killion]

Sid, except for half a season in 2010 has NEVER shown THAT level of dominance yet.

No he hasnt.... waiting... still waiting... hows his head?..... wait some more... gotta smoke Rhiessan?... all this waiting...

 

[Hardyvan123]

No doubt people would have wanted Crosby on their team over Henrik. I don't think that's what he meant at all. I think it is more along the lines of a player like Gretzky would have still destroyed Sedin in 2010 points wise. He did this to even better players, so why not Sedin?

Also, I have to ask who are the players not as good as Sedin that had two or more seasons better than Mario? A healthy Mario, just like a healthy Gretzky in his prime wouldn't and didn't lose the scoring title to players of Sedin's level. When Mario was injured, yes, then he lost those scoring titles. But I think the point is a healthy Sid got beat outright in 2010 by Sedin.

Well the post I was responding to mentioned 2 Sedins so that's why the Mario mention, injured years to both guys.

We don't know what a "Wayne" would do in 10 exactly do we?

You, like most people, think he would do just as well or close to it when the game has obviously changed and even the best offensive guys coming into the NHL in the 2000's can't play all out offensive like Wayne and Mario did back in the day.

I think that unless people acknowledge the magnitude of these changes then we aren't going to get anywhere in this discussion.

 

[Dado]

IMO, hockey has hit the hard right edge, and we will most likely never again see a player so clearly dominate the way Gretzky dominated.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Heh, even injured, missing 1/4 of the season, he still won it with 160 points in just 60 games.
Hell even Jagr did close to the same in 2000 only playing 63 games.



That was EXACTLY my point.
For Sid to truly be counted among that next tier of superstar (lets call it the Jagr level) he needs to bury these guys at some point.
Not just edge them out.

What he needs is to stay healthy AND put in a few FULL seasons like 2010 in.

When Gretz, Mario and even Jagr in their primes, stayed healthy and played a full season they were guaranteed to not just take home the Art Ross, they did so by healthy amounts.
Sid, except for half a season in 2010 has NEVER shown THAT level of dominance yet.

Man Sid must read your posts, with Malkin out he steps up and scores the first 2 goals against Tampa Bay.

Of course Stamkos is still 1 point ahead of him playing with a future HHOF guy while Sid plays with Dupuis and Kunitz?

If he was really that good he should be making those guys 100 point players right?

 

[Killion]

IMO, hockey has hit the hard right edge, and we will most likely never again see a player so clearly dominate the way Gretzky dominated.

... and I would say you are incorrect and a fatalist. Man reaches for the stars.

 

[Dado]

My belief in "reaching for the stars" is exactly why I consider the sport to have hit the hard right edge.

 

[canucks4ever]

Man Sid must read your posts, with Malkin out he steps up and scores the first 2 goals against Tampa Bay.

Of course Stamkos is still 1 point ahead of him playing with a future HHOF guy while Sid plays with Dupuis and Kunitz?

If he was really that good he should be making those guys 100 point players right?

Your going to discredit Stamkos with a straight face because he gets to play with St. Louis? Are you kidding me? Maybe Martin is having his career extended longer because hes the one playing with stamkos. Stamkos has only been in the league for 5 years and hes going to be top 5 in scoring again, and you discredit him based on his 39 year old linemate.

 

[Killion]

IMO, hockey has hit the hard right edge, and we will most likely never again see a player so clearly dominate the way Gretzky dominated.

Hard edge right is one of those expressions politicians love to trot out. Underestimating human nature & the resilience thereof as is their wont. Not applicable to the arts, the arts & sciences of playing the game of hockey. How many dimensions to the Universe & how many senses does a surrealist possess? How many Lives a Cat? 6, 9, 24, 48? How many levels of thought? You'd be surprised. Were' only on the edge's of understanding. Gretzky one of the early Pathfinders in terms of hockey sure enough, but far from unique. These are deep waters. The history of the game, the lineage, what guys accomplished in just thinking the game, right out of the box, already beyond impressive. From Art Ross on up through the ages.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Man Sid must read your posts, with Malkin out he steps up and scores the first 2 goals against Tampa Bay.

Of course Stamkos is still 1 point ahead of him playing with a future HHOF guy while Sid plays with Dupuis and Kunitz?

If he was really that good he should be making those guys 100 point players right?

Gretzky and Mario would.

And you seem to have forgotten James Neal, he's not exactly what one would call chopped liver.
He's a big guy that makes room for his linemates and is a pretty good trigger man.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Your going to discredit Stamkos with a straight face because he gets to play with St. Louis? Are you kidding me? Maybe Martin is having his career extended longer because hes the one playing with stamkos. Stamkos has only been in the league for 5 years and hes going to be top 5 in scoring again, and you discredit him based on his 39 year old linemate.

Stamkos is a great player but at some point most people would agree that playing with Marty might be more beneficial point wise to Stamkos than playing with Dupuis and Kunitiz.

If I used your train of thought I would say that you are discrediting Marty but I won't because I don't think that's the point you are trying to make.

When I look at top players there is very little to separate them sometimes and small things like line mates can be part of that equation.

Others like the dominance that Sid started with and took Stamkos a year to get into is another.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Gretzky and Mario would.

And you seem to have forgotten James Neal, he's not exactly what one would call chopped liver.
He's a big guy that makes room for his linemates and is a pretty good trigger man.

Not in post lockout NHL, give your head a shake

But then again you like to discount the huge differences in the game.

Don't bother bringing up the 43 Mario sample again as some sort of evidence as it's weak and doesn't show anything except what a superstar could do in 43 games, with some pretty good offensive players, thinking only about offense as well. It also comes in between a larger sample were he has 122 points at age 31 and a smaller less impressive sample.

Neal was a good player in Dallas and playing with Malkin has bumped up his stats to be sure but very few were predicting his offensive breakout in Dallas, it's retaliative.

 

[Killion]

... give your head a shake..

I wouldnt worry about it HV. Better players WILL be born. No mistake about that. A lot better than Gretzky, all we've seen.

I'll be long gone, dead, but ya, I would bank on it.