Gretzky/McDavid/Messier/??? Versus Lemieux/Crosby/Malkin/Francis
- Thread starter GlitchMarner
- Start date
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,752
- 46,774
Unfortunately, there seems to be a sentiment (I'm assuming from the younger fans who weren't old enough to watch Gretzky in his prime) who assume that Gretzky would suck today.
Apparently if you transported Gretzky into today's game, he'd still be using a wooden stick.
La Masse
Registered User
I didn’t watch much of Wayne either but people actually believe that the guy that has over 50 nhl records would have a hard time cutting in today’s game lol? Seems pretty naive on them. Sure he wouldnt be putting up 200 point seasons but you have to give the greatest mind to ever live all the advantages of training, technologie etc....
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,752
- 46,774
It's just nuts. Patrick Kane, who is built almost exactly like what a modern day Gretzky would be built like, managed to score 106 points one year and sweep the awards. Henrik Sedin, who isn't a good skater and who didn't have a fraction of Gretzky's goal scoring ability, won an Art Ross with 112 points. Yet Gretzky, who finished consistently in the top 3 in the dead puck era as a past-his-prime perimeter playmaker, somehow would struggle.
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,462
- 12,823
edog37
Registered User
Having watched Lemieux play live a ton of times, he was Gretzky's peer when it came to anticipation & thinking the game through. The hardest part was finding players who could think at his level. Oddly enough, the first guy to do that after Warren Young was Rob Brown. Lemieux & Gretzky were the two greatest hockey minds ever. I'll give Gretzky a nod in terms of work ethic especially given Lemieux was kinda lazy prior to the '87 Canada Cup. Afterwards, Lemieux got the idea, but still could rely on talent. His second comeback he was serious about conditioning, but by then, the damage was already done to his body.
edog37
Registered User
There is no contradiction. Gretzky came into the league with a team that had the beginnings of a dynasty. He had Messier, he had Kevin Lowe, he had Blair McDonald. He had Dave Semenko to protect him. Lemieux came on a team that had 38 points the year prior. He had guys like Doug Shedden & Terry Ruskowski to play with. He did make Warren Young a millionaire. He also got beat up regularly (hence the "garage league" comment).
I'm not saying Gretzky had to come back from cancer to be better than Lemieux, but Lemieux did do this & what sets his legacy apart. He spotted Lafontaine a 12 point lead that year & blew him away. His point projection that year would have been 229 points over an 80 game schedule. Even Flyers fans gave him a standing ovation on his return. That alone is impressive enough. I'm not saying Gretzky sucked or that he should not be mentioned, of course he is one of the GOAT. I'm saying Lemieux was better...
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,462
- 12,823
And then at one point Lemieux had Francis, Jagr, and Coffey. Mullen was a little older but Zubov and Barrasso were no slouches. If you think Kevin Lowe and Blair McDonald are on the level of these players, I dont know what to tell you. Lemieux got beat up regularly because he played a physical game, and you couldn't play a physical game in those days without some guys taking exceptions. I'm sure it would have helped to have an enforcer, but Lsmieux is not innocent in that respect.
Lemieux's comeback season was very impressive. It's not enough to make change the fact that Gretzky has the hardware, the better prime and the better peak. Even if you spot Lemieux fhe 229 points out of goodwill and assumptions, Gretzky still has what? 4 of the next 5 highest point scoring seasons? If he had gotten 4 more points in 81-82, he would have score 200 points 5 years in a row. But Lemieux is better because he "might" have done it once....
McFlash97
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 7,469
- 6,509
edog37
Registered User
Gretzky would not have had the same stats had he been on those early Pens teams. And you are talking about the Cup teams when it would have been more appropriate to compare the All-Stars to the All-Stars. Coffey did not get to Pittsburgh until about '87, so it is those teams I am talking about. Lemieux literally had no one to play with...I mean no one. And no one to protect him either. He wasn't as physical as you think. Guys played physical on him because liberties could be taken. He had no Semenko or McSorly.
Lemieux's career was cut short due to injury. Some I will attribute to his lack of good work ethic & not taking care of his body, but it was cut short nonetheless. And he was the first player in league history to average 2.0 points per game over a career (1st retirement).
turkeyslurpees
Registered User
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,462
- 12,823
How do you know he wouldn't have had those stats? Your assumption doesnt really hold up because Gretzky's point margin over his team mates in the 80's were: (next closest teammate in brackets)
79-80 - 137 points at 19 years old (43 more than Blair MacDonald, yes...Blair Macdonald)
80-81 - 164 points (89 points more than Kurri
81-82 - 212 points (107 more than Anderson)
82-83 - 196 points (90 more than Messier)
83-84 - 205 points (79 more than Coffey)
84-85 - 208 points (73 more than Kurri)
85-96 - 215 points (77 more than Messier)
I could keep going but there is no reason to, he maintained these gaps for years over his linemates and teammates. Players are setting career years with the same number of points that Gretzky had over his closest teammates.....then hes doubling it....to think that he couldn't cut it on Mario's teams in the 80's is unfounded. 1979 Oilers were garbage, Messier had 33 points and Gretzky still had 139...
Lastly, I dont get this "eye-test" stuff from other posters. At some point it should be evident that the eye-test cannot make up for the gap in Gretkzy's hockey IQ over every player who played.
gifted88
Dante the poet
We can put in anyone who played C for Edmonton?
I'll take the Edmonton players adding in Damphousse.
I'll take the Edmonton players adding in Damphousse.
edog37
Registered User
And again, Gretzky had the benefit of playing with those guys almost from the very beginning. Lemieux had 100 points his first season. He was still a -35. In fact, only 4 guys were at even or above. The Pens had a grand total of 53 points that season. The '79 Oilers had 69 points & made the playoffs. Compare that to the dumpster fire the Pens were. The Pens played in very physical division (Patrick), the Oilers played in a free skating division (Smythe). Again, Lemieux had no protector, Gretzky did. Gretzky would have put up numbers, but not the ones he put up playing in an offensively friendly division with a protector & the talent. Conditions & environment matter in this instance.
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,462
- 12,823
Lemieux only outscored his closest teammate by 28 that year. Their respective +/- doesnt matter. The oilers now are junk and we missed the playoffs, but McDavid was +20 on a -29 team. +/- isnt really a relevant stat.
Gretzky was playing with future HoF's in 82, yes, I agree. My point however, is he was doubling their point totals, but you think he wouldn't be severely outperforming the players Lemieux had to play with??? The fact is, in 1979 the Oilers were not good, check them out on hockey reference. Looks a lot like the 84pens. Sure, there is one good name but that doesnt mean he was making a huge impact when he was 19/20 years old. You seem to believe that a Messier (33 points in 79) was some unreal talent day 1 in the league. Again Gretzky scored 139 in his first year with help from Blair McDonald, I'm sure he would do just fine with Warren Young...
There's stories about what happened when people tried to play rough against Gretzky. Did they answer for it? Yes. But guess what, they couldn't even play rough against him because they couldn't catch or hit him. Lemieux played a physical game, he got rough in the corners, Gretzky didnt. As much as Lemieux didnt have a protector, he also didnt tone down his game, so he was left to answer for playing hard nose hockey. You act like Lemieux was some small guy that couldn't look after himself. He was an ox....
Fourier
Registered User
It is a myth that Gretzky's point totals were a product of the great players he played with. In fact, a case can be made that because of the depth Gretzky's numbers actually fell off as he, and the whole Oiler team, matured and played more of a controlled game.
His first year he led the league in scoring (tied with Dionne) with 137 points as an 18 year old on a team full of plugs. You seem to think highly of BJ McDonald but the guy played all of 5 years in the NHL and all of 88 games away from Gretzky out of his total of 219. He was a decent player but was basically the Oilers Warren Young. Gretzky's other winger was Brett Callighen. Gallighen played 160 NHL games and had 145 points. Away from Gretzky he was not good enough to stick in the League.
If you look at the teams they had in their first year outside of Gretzky and Lemieux the most talented player on either team at that point was Mike Bullard. (Messier was pretty much a train wreck a lot of the time in 79-80). Wayne Babych was on the decline but he had already had a 54 goal 96 point season in his career. NO Oiler on the 79-80 squad had ever come close to that. And the most productive defenseman on either team was Mantha.
Gretzky's line mates in the year he scored 212 points were primarily Kurri, who was in his second year and still quite unknown, and Dave Lumley. That year he had 107 points more than the nearest guy on his team, a 20 year old Glenn Anderson in his second year. Lumley was able to set the Oilers record for most consecutive games scoring a goal while playing with Gretzky.
I watched that team live. It was Gretzky driving the whole enchilada for at least the first three years.
Last edited:
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,462
- 12,823
I agree. The stats dont in any way support the notion that, "Gretzky would not put up those points with Lemieux's teammates". He would still easily be crushing his teammates by 70-100 points every year.
DFF
Registered User
- Feb 28, 2002
- 22,318
- 6,567
I am a Flames fan but it's Gretzky without a doubt and he has the records to prove it....your argument is just a bunch of what ifs...to be blunt it's bullshit. Lemieux may have comparable talent but production wise Gretzky had him beat by a fair margin
edog37
Registered User
I am not arguing the records. This is a subjective argument on who is better....
edog37
Registered User
I concur with your read on Mike Bullard. However, he was also jealous of Lemieux which is why he eventually left. And again, looking at the constructs of the teams, the Pens were far worse off & for far longer a time period.
To expand on this point, Gretzky had a 6 year span where he averaged more than 200 pts/season. Lemieux never broke 200 and came close 1x. Gretzky has a 10 year span averaging 180 pts/season. Lemieux only broke 180 1x ever. Obviously Lemieux was on pace to put up closer numbers to Gretzky but didn't due to injury. But that's part of the game. Gretzky was way healthier than Lemieux, and that's part of why many consider Gretzky better. PPG paces are great, but I'd rather have the guy with slightly higher PPG who ALSO played 500+ more games.
I feel Crosby and Malkin both suffer from that same problem, and this is why I'd take the Oilers team. They are far more likely to be in the lineup on any given night, not watching injured from the sidelines. Messier also brings some nasty toughness, which shouldn't be entirely ignored. If both teams are perfectly healthy, its really close. But if I'm putting together a team at the start of the season and have each of these players in their primes, I take Edmonton and don't feel the slightest big hesitant.
