Gretzky and Lemieux (mod: and now Orr) in the "new" NHL

[iDangleDangle]

How young do you think everyone on the history board is? Anyone in his or her early 30s saw plenty of Lemieux in his prime. Many posters on this board also saw Gretzky in his prime.

And while the game is faster than it was in the late 90s, it is most definitely not as physical.

That "too young" comment was pointed at the people the age of me who were born in the early 90's. We didn't get to see Prime-Gretzky in an age where we could comprehend his greatness, so that might be why some are selling him short (which I dont' think I am).

And yeah, I think the game is more physical nowadays. Physicality is so much more than the cheap shots and blind side hits that were regular then. The pace of the game combined with the general built and strength of players in my mind leads to a game that is more physical in many levels than hockey of the 90's.

 

[The Panther]

Is it blasphemy to say that Gretzky would be the best player of the game, but just wouldn't flat out dominate and win the scoring race by 50+ points? I think it's just being realistic and leaving the nostalgia factor out.

It's not blasphemy, it's just silliness.

WHO CARES HOW GRETZKY WOULD DO NOW? It's not important to anything.

It kind baffles me why people create endless threads on this kind of topic. How would Joe Malone do as Joe Thornton's winger? I have no idea. I don't care. I only care about what he actually did, in his time.

 

[Thenameless]

Spoken like a truly delusional Caps fan...

Ovie couldn't carry Mario's jock in a wheelbarrow while #66 was in his prime. Mario was TWICE the player that Ovie will be at any point in his career, although he will be the best Caps player that ever lived, so there's always that.

I didn't want to say anything, but these are more or less my sentiments when I saw that same comment. Lemieux, to me, is the best goal scorer that ever lived. Ovechkin will have nice numbers during his prime, but he relies too much on physical ability, which diminishes greatly with age. What Lemieux could do late in his career as a goal scorer, Ovechkin will not be able to do.

 

[Boxscore]

Honestly, I think people's perception here are either clouded by blind nostalgia or the fact they didn't see Gretzky or Mario play in their prime

I've been watching the game since the late-70's so I've seen much of both players in their prime.

(and neither have I, except for the footage of course, which is plentiful).

So then how could you so easily discredit those who have?

I have no doubt Gretzky and Lemieux would be the two best players in the league, but they wouldn't be outscoring guys like Crosby or Stamkos by 40+ points.

Sure they would. You're talking about the 2 greatest offensive forwards in NHL history, spanning close to 100 years.

The game has changed so much. It is much faster, physical (not counting the slashing and dirty plays of old school hockey, but the general strain of the game), goalies are from a completely another universe (it was laughably easy to score on 70's and 80's goalies), even the 4th liners are versatile and really athletic players...and how about strategies? Defensive play, special teams, trapping and etc. are far more effective and eloquent than they were back in the day, even in the 90's. It's just a different game now. Evolved.

And you don't think players like Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr would have also evolved? Better training, better diet, better equipment, better coaching, better medicine and physical therapy would make all 3 of them ever more superior than they were during their prime.

I just can't see anyone dominatin today's league in a way they score 150+ points or something. Not even The Great One. The

That is crazy. Heck, a "healthy" Crosby could flirt with 125-130 points in today's game. You mean to tell me the 2 single greatest forwards in NHL history couldn't outscore Sidney-freaking-Crosby by 20-30 points?!

99, 66 and 4 would shred the league today. Especially the way PP's are being called the second a player is touched. Someone described Lemieux as a bigger, more talented Malkin... and that is true, but that's not even doing it justice. Add 2-3 inches to Malkin, give him better hands than Pat Kane, a better shot than Stamkos or Ovechkin, Datsyuk's stickhandling, better passing than Thornton and a hockey IQ that is completely unparalleled by today's players and you have something close to Mario.

 

[Cawz]

1986/87
1 Wayne Gretzky* 183
2 Jari Kurri* 108
3 Mario Lemieux* 107
4 Mark Messier* 107
5 Doug Gilmour* 105
6 Dino Ciccarelli* 103
7 Dale Hawerchuk* 100
8 Michel Goulet* 96
9 Raymond Bourque* 95
10 Tim Kerr 95

11 Ron Francis* 93
12 Denis Savard* 90
13 Steve Yzerman* 90
14 Joe Mullen* 87
15 Walt Poddubny 87
16 Bryan Trottier* 87
17 Marcel Dionne* 84
18 Steve Larmer 84
19 Luc Robitaille* 84
20 Larry Murphy* 81

21 Bernie Nicholls 81
22 Mats Naslund 80
23 Dan Quinn 80
24 Aaron Broten 79
25 Jimmy Carson 79
26 Kevin Dineen 79
27 Tony Tanti 79
28 Esa Tikkanen 78
29 Peter Stastny* 77
30 Al MacInnis* 76

2006/07
1 Sidney Crosby 120
2 Joe Thornton 114
3 Vincent Lecavalier 108
4 Dany Heatley 105
5 Martin St. Louis 102
6 Marian Hossa 100
7 Joe Sakic* 100
8 Jaromir Jagr 96
9 Marc Savard 96
10 Daniel Briere 95

11 Jarome Iginla 94
12 Teemu Selanne 94
13 Alex Ovechkin 92
14 Olli Jokinen 91
15 Daniel Alfredsson 87
16 Pavel Datsyuk 87
17 Jason Spezza 87
18 Evgeni Malkin 85
19 Daniel Sedin 84
20 Thomas Vanek 84

21 Andrew Brunette 83
22 Michael Nylander 83
23 Ray Whitney 83
24 Rod Brind'Amour 82
25 Henrik Sedin 81
26 Alex Tanguay 81
27 Mike Cammalleri 80
28 Vyacheslav Kozlov 80
29 Patrick Marleau 78
30 Andy McDonald 78

86/87 was a deflated points year for most players. 06/07 was an inflated points year for most players.

So in a 80s season when points are deflated so that only 7 players get over 100 points and 23 players get over 80 points, Gretzky got 183 (down from hitting 200 points 4 of his last 5 years, and 196 in the other year).

Now compare that the a 2000s season when points are inflated so that 7 players again get over 100 points but 28 players get over 80 points, Crosby gets 120.

I like this comparison, since it shows that a deflated 80s year is very similar to an inflated 2000's year, except for one anomaly.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Great example, Cawz. I'm sure I'll be quoting it many times in the future.

Any idea of why 1986-87 was such a down year for top scorers, compared to surrounding years?

 

[Cawz]

Great example, Cawz. I'm sure I'll be quoting it many times in the future.

Any idea of why 1986-87 was such a down year for top scorers, compared to surrounding years?

No, I was actually going to ask if anyone knew. It was too long ago for me to recall.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

No, I was actually going to ask if anyone knew. It was too long ago for me to recall.

Lemieux had injuries and the Islander finally declined, so those would affect the players at the top, but don't seem really relevant to the 20th place scorers or whatever

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Lemieux had injuries and the Islander finally declined, so those would affect the players at the top, but don't seem really relevant to the 20th place scorers or whatever

It looks like 86-87 was the year the effects of the "Gretzky Rule" kicked in. It was instituted in 85-86 but there was a big jump in power-plays that year that off-set the effects.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It looks like 86-87 was the year the effects of the "Gretzky Rule" kicked in. It was instituted in 85-86 but there was a big jump in power-plays that year that off-set the effects.

Thanks! Make sense.

Ah... the days when the NHL actually made a rule change to decrease scoring

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Thanks! Make sense.

Ah... the days when the NHL actually made a rule change to decrease scoring

Yeah, there are times when it seems the NHL sees what the NFL is doing and immediately tries to do the exact opposite

 

[Big Phil]

Mario gets a free pass because there exists a very direct stylistic comparable with 2 art rosses under his belt. Make Malkin an inch or two taller, wider frame, a Chara sized stick (used with greater precision than his current one), significantly softer hands than his already soft hands and better vision and it's difficult to think his numbers would not be higher than they have been.

It's a little tougher to visualize with 99 because he lacks a stylistically similar modern player. Nugent-Hopkins might be the closest in terms of style, but it's a really insufficient comparable. Nowhere near as close as 66 and 71.

This isn't to say 99 would fail or not be the league's best player or anything. Just that there's not any direct example of a similar player winning scoring titles in recent history. So you get doubters.

Yeah I guess. I mean, that's a lot of "ifs" with Malkin. The thing with Malkin is that he can't do what Mario did like win a scoring title in 60 games. He's also been to wildly inconsistent in his career, even in the regular season. But I agree he is stylistically close. But no one before or since Gretzky has actually LOOKED like Gretzky on the ice. I think that's the difference here. The fact that in 100 years we've only had one Gretzky should tell you something. It should tell people something that this is a guy who played with incredible vision and hockey sense. I would say anticipation was Gretzky's greatest weapon. You can't see it on the ice if you are just casually watching it though.

Honestly, I think people's perception here are either clouded by blind nostalgia or the fact they didn't see Gretzky or Mario play in their prime (and neither have I, except for the footage of course, which is plentiful).

I have no doubt Gretzky and Lemieux would be the two best players in the league, but they wouldn't be outscoring guys like Crosby or Stamkos by 40+ points. The game has changed so much. It is much faster, physical (not counting the slashing and dirty plays of old school hockey, but the general strain of the game), goalies are from a completely another universe (it was laughably easy to score on 70's and 80's goalies), even the 4th liners are versatile and really athletic players...and how about strategies? Defensive play, special teams, trapping and etc. are far more effective and eloquent than they were back in the day, even in the 90's. It's just a different game now. Evolved.

I just can't see anyone dominatin today's league in a way they score 150+ points or something. Not even The Great One. The

A teenage Crosby gets 120, Thornton gets 125 and Gretzky can't get 150? Come on. There is no doubt in my mind the guy would be ripping up the NHL. Leaving Crosby in the dust. I know this is hard for people to fathom, but how special would Gretzky be if his kind came around every 10 years? We've been hoping for this to happen for a while but it never does, and never will in my opinion. You can't explain how he played by typing it on a keyboard. You can with Mario or Orr or Messier. Gretzky you can't.

Last time I checked Gretzky embarrassed a ton of all-time great players in the scoring race in the 1980s and as late as 1991. Embarrassed them. These guys couldn't score past these "weak" goalies and surpass 150 points but Gretzky blew past 200 several times. Something isn't right here.

1986/87
1 Wayne Gretzky* 183
2 Jari Kurri* 108
3 Mario Lemieux* 107
4 Mark Messier* 107
5 Doug Gilmour* 105
6 Dino Ciccarelli* 103
7 Dale Hawerchuk* 100
8 Michel Goulet* 96
9 Raymond Bourque* 95
10 Tim Kerr 95

11 Ron Francis* 93
12 Denis Savard* 90
13 Steve Yzerman* 90
14 Joe Mullen* 87
15 Walt Poddubny 87
16 Bryan Trottier* 87
17 Marcel Dionne* 84
18 Steve Larmer 84
19 Luc Robitaille* 84
20 Larry Murphy* 81

21 Bernie Nicholls 81
22 Mats Naslund 80
23 Dan Quinn 80
24 Aaron Broten 79
25 Jimmy Carson 79
26 Kevin Dineen 79
27 Tony Tanti 79
28 Esa Tikkanen 78
29 Peter Stastny* 77
30 Al MacInnis* 76

2006/07
1 Sidney Crosby 120
2 Joe Thornton 114
3 Vincent Lecavalier 108
4 Dany Heatley 105
5 Martin St. Louis 102
6 Marian Hossa 100
7 Joe Sakic* 100
8 Jaromir Jagr 96
9 Marc Savard 96
10 Daniel Briere 95

11 Jarome Iginla 94
12 Teemu Selanne 94
13 Alex Ovechkin 92
14 Olli Jokinen 91
15 Daniel Alfredsson 87
16 Pavel Datsyuk 87
17 Jason Spezza 87
18 Evgeni Malkin 85
19 Daniel Sedin 84
20 Thomas Vanek 84

21 Andrew Brunette 83
22 Michael Nylander 83
23 Ray Whitney 83
24 Rod Brind'Amour 82
25 Henrik Sedin 81
26 Alex Tanguay 81
27 Mike Cammalleri 80
28 Vyacheslav Kozlov 80
29 Patrick Marleau 78
30 Andy McDonald 78

86/87 was a deflated points year for most players. 06/07 was an inflated points year for most players.

So in a 80s season when points are deflated so that only 7 players get over 100 points and 23 players get over 80 points, Gretzky got 183 (down from hitting 200 points 4 of his last 5 years, and 196 in the other year).

Now compare that the a 2000s season when points are inflated so that 7 players again get over 100 points but 28 players get over 80 points, Crosby gets 120.

I like this comparison, since it shows that a deflated 80s year is very similar to an inflated 2000's year, except for one anomaly.

Nice example. Wow. How good is Gretzky? He blows out his own linemate by 65 points. Amazing.

Any idea of why 1986-87 was such a down year for top scorers, compared to surrounding years?

I think a lot of it had to do with the Oilers. They scored "only" 372 goals that year as opposed to much more than 400, like 446 or something. Still blew away the rest of the league though. The next best was Calgary and L.A. at 318. There were far less teams in 1987 with over 300 goals than in 1986. For starters, the Oilers started to play a bit smarter after their 1986 debacle. Don't blame Steve Smith, that was just the culmination of things. They were cocky and thinking they could win on talent alone in 1986. Kind of like the 1971 Bruins or 1993 Pens. The difference is, the Oilers won two straight Cups afterwards. Because while they could still score in droves, they played a bit smarter in the regular season.

So I think a lot of the rest of the NHL followed suit. No one was sure if the Oilers type of hockey could create a dynasty (they only had two Cups starting in 1986-'87 and the Habs had just won with a rookie goalie and more of a defensive-friendly team. Teams copied, as usual.

 

[The Panther]

It's worth remembering that Gretzky had no problem scoring on goalies like Patrick Roy. Who was a long-time teammate of Peter Forsberg, whom this board apparently thinks is one of the 5 greatest players of all time. Gretzky also regularly made Bourque his b****. Bourque was also a teammate of the great Roy and of Forsberg.

So, here's my question: If Gretzky could score on Roy no problem and could school Bourque when they met, how could a 24-year-old Gretzky not also blow everybody away today? Those are players who both thrived in the dead-puck era, in the latter halves of their careers.

From 1986-87:
Gretzky vs. Roy:


Gretzky vs. Bourque (check out how bad Gretz makes Bourque look on his hat-trick goal):

 

[Killion]

You know Gang, I have a real problem with this whole fantastical hypothesis and every other thread like this one that appears from time-time as Ive mentioned in the past....

For starters, did Bobby Orr not "change the way the game is played by Defenceman" and ultimately how the offensive game was played with a more fully formed 5 man attack? Huh? Just as Harvey had & Shore before him?... So, if you take him out of the late 60's & 70's, just what player wouldve done that, accomplished what he did in paving new roads to the changes in the game? Not a one of em. Would a Paul Coffey have ever existed? Not likely. Would we even have mobile, offensively oriented Defenders or would the NA Game & the NHL still be playing it whereby Defenceman rarely if ever carried the puck (with a few exceptions like Harvey, Horton early in his career & so on) and parked themselves at the Blue line etc etc etc.

Assuming the Summit Series & Canada Cups, the WHA with the Nilsson-Hedberg-Hull line existed, the full cycle game with engagement by the Defenders, well, when would it have really hit absent Gretzky & the Oilers? Maybe not until the 90's with the falling of the Iron Curtain. Gretzky, the Oil, he/they changed the game, the way its played, thought. No Gretzky through the 80's & 90's, completely different dynamic. Lemieux was more proto-typical, didnt really "change" anything, much in the mold of Jean Beliveau. So youve gotta wipe the slate clean. Re-imagine how the game would be played had Orr & Gretzky not been born in 1948 & 1961 respectively. Then you have to pick a new date, lets say both born in 1985 or 1990, both at 24 right now right here. And if you do that, then they would turn the hockey world on its ear just as they did in their earlier incarnations & with the same profound effects. These were Wunderkinds, once in a hundred year players, a Wayne Gretzky we may never see the like of again.

So rather than dealing with fiction when fact is so much more fun, how about we discuss realities & not these flights of fancy that are unquantifiable as you must first re-imagine the game itself when you remove two such seminal game changing players from the equation & then factor in all of the rest of the history of the game from 1966 onwards. This is not the History of Hockey Fantasy Board. We realize its a "fun topic" but just remember, dont be taking it seriously. Folly to do so, and most come here to discuss reality, not fiction & "what ifs".

 

[shazariahl]

You know Gang, I have a real problem with this whole fantastical hypothesis and every other thread like this one that appears from time-time as Ive mentioned in the past....

For starters, did Bobby Orr not "change the way the game is played by Defenceman" and ultimately how the offensive game was played with a more fully formed 5 man attack? Huh? Just as Harvey had & Shore before him?... So, if you take him out of the late 60's & 70's, just what player wouldve done that, accomplished what he did in paving new roads to the changes in the game? Not a one of em. Would a Paul Coffey have ever existed? Not likely. Would we even have mobile, offensively oriented Defenders or would the NA Game & the NHL still be playing it whereby Defenceman rarely if ever carried the puck (with a few exceptions like Harvey, Horton early in his career & so on) and parked themselves at the Blue line etc etc etc.

Assuming the Summit Series & Canada Cups, the WHA with the Nilsson-Hedberg-Hull line existed, the full cycle game with engagement by the Defenders, well, when would it have really hit absent Gretzky & the Oilers? Maybe not until the 90's with the falling of the Iron Curtain. Gretzky, the Oil, he/they changed the game, the way its played, thought. No Gretzky through the 80's & 90's, completely different dynamic. Lemieux was more proto-typical, didnt really "change" anything, much in the mold of Jean Beliveau. So youve gotta wipe the slate clean. Re-imagine how the game would be played had Orr & Gretzky not been born in 1948 & 1961 respectively. Then you have to pick a new date, lets say both born in 1985 or 1990, both at 24 right now right here. And if you do that, then they would turn the hockey world on its ear just as they did in their earlier incarnations & with the same profound effects. These were Wunderkinds, once in a hundred year players, a Wayne Gretzky we may never see the like of again.

So rather than dealing with fiction when fact is so much more fun, how about we discuss realities & not these flights of fancy that are unquantifiable as you must first re-imagine the game itself when you remove two such seminal game changing players from the equation & then factor in all of the rest of the history of the game from 1966 onwards. This is not the History of Hockey Fantasy Board. We realize its a "fun topic" but just remember, dont be taking it seriously. Folly to do so, and most come here to discuss reality, not fiction & "what ifs".

Excellent points. l do wonder if Coffey would have been allowed to play his style or not. I mean, even in his time he was often maligned for his lack of defense. If it hadn't been for Orr blazing that trail just shortly before him, would Coffey have even been permitted to play the way he did? I would never go so far as to say he would have played differently (though who knows - maybe he would have), but I think coaches may have been less forgiving of his playstyle had Orr not so recently done the things he had.

OTOH, we may have looked at Coffey in a more favorable light. If Orr hadn't shown that even higher offense was possible from a Dman (while also playing better D than Coffey), Coffey would be hands-down the greatest offensive Dman in history. It's possible he wins a lot more Norris trophies in that case. I feel he was often punished because people thought of him as an inferior version of Orr. Had Orr not existed, there wouldn't be anyone else to compare him to. We may have looked at Coffey and said "Well, it's impossible to be THAT good offensively without giving up on D a lot of the time" because... well, it would have looked that way since no one else had ever reached those scoring levels as a Dman. Without Orr winning 2 Art Rosses, Coffey's 2nd place finishes to Gretzky suddenly look extremely impressive.

 

[Cawz]

Nice example. Wow. How good is Gretzky? He blows out his own linemate by 65 points. Amazing.

Thanks. I was kind of hoping that some of the Gretzky haters would try to refute this, but so far no luck.

 

[tazzy19]

It looks like 86-87 was the year the effects of the "Gretzky Rule" kicked in. It was instituted in 85-86 but there was a big jump in power-plays that year that off-set the effects.

Exactly right. Gretzky compensated for this by concentrating on scoring 2 assists per game, which allowed him to break his own single season points record with 215 points. Now just imagine how many points Gretzky would have scored in 1985-86 had they not put in the "Gretzky Rule"? In some ways I think 1985-86 was his most impressive season simply because he was able to maintain his 210+ point standard despite all the efforts by then to slow him down….

 

[Rhiessan71]

Clement is so far out to lunch its not even funny. The only way Lemieux comes remotely close to 300 points is if his team had over 900 PP opportunities in a season.
Orr was the best overall even strength player in history imo but Gretzky was the best offensive ES player in history and I'm sorry but Mario was definitely NOT on Gretzky's level at ES.

 

[archstanton]

It's worth remembering that Gretzky had no problem scoring on goalies like Patrick Roy. Who was a long-time teammate of Peter Forsberg, whom this board apparently thinks is one of the 5 greatest players of all time. Gretzky also regularly made Bourque his b****. Bourque was also a teammate of the great Roy and of Forsberg.

So, here's my question: If Gretzky could score on Roy no problem and could school Bourque when they met, how could a 24-year-old Gretzky not also blow everybody away today? Those are players who both thrived in the dead-puck era, in the latter halves of their careers.

From 1986-87:
Gretzky vs. Roy:


Gretzky vs. Bourque (check out how bad Gretz makes Bourque look on his hat-trick goal):

 

[Big Phil]

Not bad. A 1996 Gretzky somehow managed to outskate Bill Guerin who won a fastest skater competition at the all-star game after this. There were times Gretzky still had those quick bursts, although we saw it a lot less after the Suter hit in 1991. But here he has it. And of course as usual because of his instincts and anticipation he is a step ahead of everyone.

 

[Big Phil]

Thanks. I was kind of hoping that some of the Gretzky haters would try to refute this, but so far no luck.

They wouldn't really have a prayer with that.

 

[Fred Taylor]

Not bad. A 1996 Gretzky somehow managed to outskate Bill Guerin who won a fastest skater competition at the all-star game after this. There were times Gretzky still had those quick bursts, although we saw it a lot less after the Suter hit in 1991. But here he has it. And of course as usual because of his instincts and anticipation he is a step ahead of everyone.

But he wouldn't score 30 goals today against these modern goaltenders!

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

But he wouldn't score 30 goals today against these modern goaltenders!

I do believe there was a certain Mr. Brodeur in net for that goal

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

Not bad. A 1996 Gretzky somehow managed to outskate Bill Guerin who won a fastest skater competition at the all-star game after this. There were times Gretzky still had those quick bursts, although we saw it a lot less after the Suter hit in 1991. But here he has it. And of course as usual because of his instincts and anticipation he is a step ahead of everyone.

Exactly, and this clip proves why today's 'more athletic players' and 'more advanced defensive systems' wouldn't really slow 99 down at all: errant puck bounces off the boards and boom. Gretzky's on it and headed down ice. The guy was simply supernatural. The term, 'first to every loose puck' doesn't do it justice because that implies there would be some sort of race. There rarely was with Gretzky. He was usually already there.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Exactly, and this clip proves why today's 'more athletic players' and 'more advanced defensive systems' wouldn't really slow 99 down at all: errant puck bounces off the boards and boom. Gretzky's on it and headed down ice. The guy was simply supernatural. The term, 'first to every loose puck' doesn't do it justice because that implies there would be some sort of race. There rarely was with Gretzky. He was usually already there.

And his shot accuracy on the fly was just unreal.