Hockey's Biggest "What if"?

[DannyGallivan]

Crosby. I think 2011, 2012 and 2013 would have been his best seasons without injuries. I get all the people countering with "pace doesn't mean full seasons" - and I acknowledge that Crosby in particular has been notorious in his career for being streaky during some seasons - but I still think those 3 seasons would have been a considerable step up from the rest. I think in 2011 or 2012 he'd have surpassed 120 again, maybe even approached 130 points. How does that impact his legacy? I think he'd be among the select few players with a strong argument for the 5th best peak in hockey after the big 4. His offensive peak would be on the level of Jagr, maybe even slightly above. I think he'd have 3 extra Art Ross trophies to his name, and at least 2 harts (maybe 3). I think he'd stack up pretty nicely to Howe after 13 seasons.

Again, I agree (although he would still be looking up at Gordie).

 

[VMBM]

What if Canada actually prepared for this game?
What if they were in mid-season condition?
What if they played together as a team for a full season?

8-0 Canada, including a few blowouts. The Soviets' depth and defense were always in question.

You'd think that Canada would have dominated the Soviets in the later matchups then; you know, since they were better prepared and had much better teams on paper than in 1972.

 

[ted2019]

with Orr, I think you can easily make a case we didnt see his best.

for starters, we never saw him healthy. He played his career with nagging knee injuries.

also, he was on what you could call a rise to his true peak when he stopped playing.

His final 3 full years saw improvements of:

29-72-101
32-90-122
46-89-135

His final full year is pretty easily his 2nd best of his career.

46 goals was his career high by 9
135 points was only 4 off his career high, and is 13 more than his 3rd highest scoring year.

Its not out of the question to think between 1977 and 1983 he could've hit 150 points.

He would've only been 27-33 years old, and would've been playing with Brad Park, then with Ray Bourque

If Orr stayed healthy, who says Park and/or Bourque ever becomes a Bruin?

 

[DannyGallivan]

You'd think that Canada would have dominated the Soviets in the later matchups then; you know, since they were better prepared had much better teams on paper than in 1972.

Canada won four of five Canada Cups, and came in second in the other one.
Canada lost one game (albeit badly) in their only second place Canada Cup finish in '81.
Canada also dominated Russia in the Olympics after the NHLers were allowed in, including three gold medals.

If anything, the Soviets of the 1980's were considerably better than their team from the 70's, and still had the advantage of playing together throughout the year(s). Canada has always had to fight through the whole "getting together as a team" concept. If any Team Canada during those years played together as a team for a whole season... I really think things would go very, very badly for the Soviet/Russians.

Besides, I like the fact that the games and series were - for the most part - so close. It made for incredible drama. Any source of entertainment outside of music requires drama... protagonist, antagonist, obstacles, threats, stress... to be entertaining.

The Soviets/Russians have been great for a long time, and will always be a well-deserved "number 2" behind Canada's crown.

 

[ted2019]

What happens if Tim Kerr had more then 1 shoulder during the 1986-87 finals against Edmonton? Instead of the Oilers winning in 7 games, do the Flyers win in 6?

 

[streitz]

What if Anatoli Firsov had played? What if Tarasov and Chernyshev had been Team USSR's coaches? What if Tretiak had been a bit older and more experienced? What if Yevgeni Zimin (2+1 after the first two games and considered to be one of the best Soviet players by e.g. Foster Hewitt and Brian Conacher) hadn't been injured and had played after game 2 also? What if a healthy Kharlamov plays all the games?

Still 6-2 or 7-1 for Canada? I'd say bollocks.

So that the revisionism does not get too one-sided.

What if the Soviets were only pulling from a population of 22 million instead of 240 million?


What if Canada put as much money into it's sports programs as Soviet bloc countries?


8-0? Doesn't seem out of the question.

 

[VMBM]

Canada won four of five Canada Cups, and came in second in the other one.
Canada lost one game (albeit badly) in their only second place Canada Cup finish in '81.
Canada also dominated Russia in the Olympics after the NHLers were allowed in, including three gold medals.

Did not say a word about Russia, quite irrelevant.

The Canada Cups were quite different from the 1972 series, since all the games were played in Canada (or USA). While the Canada Cup was the closest thing to a genuine best-on-best tournament hockey had to offer, you can hardly compare it to 1972. Frankly speaking, if the 1987 CC, for example, had been played in the Soviet Union/Europe, USSR would have won clearly imo. In 1984 probably too.

If anything, the Soviets of the 1980's were considerably better than their team from the 70's, and still had the advantage of playing together throughout the year(s). Canada has always had to fight through the whole "getting together as a team" concept. If any Team Canada during those years played together as a team for a whole season... I really think things would go very, very badly for the Soviet/Russians.

Not on paper though. It was rather Canada who would have much more impressive teams later on, when you look at the names.

The Soviets/Russians have been great for a long time, and will always be a well-deserved "number 2" behind Canada's crown.

Oh really now?

The question was whether Canada would have blown out USSR in 1972 with Orr and Hull, and I say that they wouldn't have - at least if the Soviet Union, and not only Canada, is allowed to have those "what ifs" too.

 

[brachyrynchos]

What if the US team doesn't make the medal round with the Miracle on Ice? How much would it have changed player developement and the college programs in the states and the exposure and interest that the Gold medal brought? Maybe not much of a difference, but who knows I guess. No movie with Karl Malden, though.

 

[YEM]

What happens if Tim Kerr had more then 1 shoulder during the 1986-87 finals against Edmonton? Instead of the Oilers winning in 7 games, do the Flyers win in 6?

kerr had 58 goals and 95 points that season
missed all the finals
would be equivalent to Edmonton missing either Messier or Kurri during that Finals
very good chance the Flyers win that series with a healthy Kerr in the lineup...

 

[Talisman]

what if Bobby hull and Gordie howe never have jumped to WHA??. Would gretzky still be the number goal scorer/points man in NHL history?. if we assume that Howe and Hull puts the same amount of points in NHL that what they put up in WHA in 70s.

 

[bobholly39]

what if Bobby hull and Gordie howe never have jumped to WHA??. Would gretzky still be the number goal scorer/points man in NHL history?. if we assume that Howe and Hull puts the same amount of points in NHL that what they put up in WHA in 70s.

Yes.

Hull has 913 combined goals.
Howe has 975.
Gretzky has 894.

Now let's assume 1 WHA goal = 1 NHL goal (it probably should be less though).

Gretzky beat every single record there is to beat. I think he left a lot (well - some) on the table still. He could have gone further. You know how he scored 92 goals one year? I GUARANTEE you if someone before him held the record at 95 goals - he'd have found a way to top 96 one season.

I think Gretzky was methodical and smart and gunning for the record, and he'd have found a way.

Lemieux could top him because he's a "better" goal-scorer imo - but also he came after. If Gretzky had a different # to shoot for to top the goal record I think he does it, somehow.

 

[The Panther]

What happens if Tim Kerr had more then 1 shoulder during the 1986-87 finals against Edmonton? Instead of the Oilers winning in 7 games, do the Flyers win in 6?

Or, possibly the Oilers win in 4 straight. The only reason they didn't sweep the '87 Final is they started taking Philly lightly in game three, and blew a 3-0 lead. Otherwise it was a sweep.

Philly was on its way down in spring '87, IMO.

 

[bobholly39]

Well, for me Orr is the best ever anyways. However, for the Lemieux/Gretzky comparison, I could probably go so far as to say that a healthy Mario would have eclipsed the Great One (well, narrowly edged him anyways). I base that on how dominant he was after his return from retirement, until his body forced him to slow down yet again. That was after several seasons off and at an advanced age.

Its too hard to predict longevity for Lemieux. Its true he was quite a bit better than Gretzky at a later age - but its hard to determine if he had an advantage or disavantage and how added seasons would help or hurt that.

Was it "better" for Lemieux that he got to rest up for a few years and had less mileage and therefore could perform better?
Or was it still "worst" because of how rusty he would have been but also based on all accumulated injuries hurting him.
Or does it even out?

I think the biggest differentiator remains the playoffs. Gretzky did a lot better than Lemieux and even if their overall regular season resumes were comparable - playoffs would be a significant plus for Gretzky

 

[Talisman]

Yes.

Hull has 913 combined goals.
Howe has 975.
Gretzky has 894.

Now let's assume 1 WHA goal = 1 NHL goal (it probably should be less though).

Gretzky beat every single record there is to beat. I think he left a lot (well - some) on the table still. He could have gone further. You know how he scored 92 goals one year? I GUARANTEE you if someone before him held the record at 95 goals - he'd have found a way to top 96 one season.

I think Gretzky was methodical and smart and gunning for the record, and he'd have found a way.

Lemieux could top him because he's a "better" goal-scorer imo - but also he came after. If Gretzky had a different # to shoot for to top the goal record I think he does it, somehow.

i agree, the goals stats was the point in my argument.

 

[Iceman]

Naslund - Lemieux - Jagr if things worked out for Naslund in Pittsburgh and the stars aligned etc. Would be pretty cool... offensively at least.

 

[The Panther]

As usual, this kind of speculative thread has turned into the predictable "let's fantasize every possible way to demean Gretzky's achievements by giving all the benefits to everyone else".

Mario Lemieux erasing any of Gretzky's significant season/career records? I don't see it.

First of all, Mario enjoyed fine health and a team that actually told him "you don't have to play defense" (according to Mario himself) for his first 5.5 years in the League. How many of Gretzky's records fell, or were approached, during this time of Mario's full strength? One: most short-handed goals in a season. Full marks to Mario for that one, but it hardly made anyone forget Wayne. Here's how the two players compare after 6 seasons:

Mario: 1.96 PPG: 345G + 493A = 838PTS (+17)
Wayne: 2.37 PPG: 429G + 693A = 1122PTS (+374)

I mean, right off the first six years, Mario is already 84 goals and almost 300 points behind Gretz. That is a lot of ground to make up before he passes his prime, which likely occurs -- even if he's in perfect health -- about six or seven years later.

Second, the only season in which Mario seriously threatened any Gretzky season records (by pace) is 1992-93, the "easiest" season ever for top-line players to rack up points, during which Mario played on a better, more dominant team than he'd ever played for before or would play for again (meaning: this kind of scenario would not re-occur for him, regardless of his health). His per-game stats that (60-game) season are highly inflated by the ridiculous hot-streak he was on at the end of the Pens' season, when they went 18 games undefeated and he scored a bazillion goals. But in the playoffs, after scoring 4 points in game one, he then scored 14 in the next 10, to close out the season. He simply was not going to maintain that pace.

Lemieux after 1993 is tricky, because of lingering back-issues and, I think, some confidence issues after his cancer scare. It would have been nice to see him play every year and dominate with his amazing skill, but playing enough to break Gretzky's records...? I mean, this is the guy -- the 6'4'', 230 lb. guy, mind -- who quit pro-hockey because it was too hard, and preferred golfing to representing his country.

__________

I would have loved it if Orr could have stayed a Bruin until well into Ray Bourque's era, say until 1984 or something. But I have this feeling that if he'd been in Chicago, still in health, from 1976 to 1984 or something, he'd have been a 85 point, +20 kind of defenseman who'd have made the All Star team regularly, but not the 1st position, and would have been on some bad losing teams. (We may have had to suffer the indignity of Randy Carlyle winning a Norris over Orr...)

 

[DannyGallivan]

Its too hard to predict longevity for Lemieux. Its true he was quite a bit better than Gretzky at a later age - but its hard to determine if he had an advantage or disavantage and how added seasons would help or hurt that.

Was it "better" for Lemieux that he got to rest up for a few years and had less mileage and therefore could perform better?
Or was it still "worst" because of how rusty he would have been but also based on all accumulated injuries hurting him.
Or does it even out?

I think the biggest differentiator remains the playoffs. Gretzky did a lot better than Lemieux and even if their overall regular season resumes were comparable - playoffs would be a significant plus for Gretzky

Again, I don't know about that. Lemieux had two consecutive Conn Smythe trophies and was a his usual point-producing self in the playoffs.

 

[streitz]

As usual, this kind of speculative thread has turned into the predictable "let's fantasize every possible way to demean Gretzky's achievements by giving all the benefits to everyone else".

Yes yes, you love Gretzky we all know this. Of course you don't take into account Lemieux's first 6 years was spent on a complete crap teams which had no real talent aside from Lemieux himself up until they got Coffey.



That being said there's no way Howe or Hull beat Gretzky in goals even if they don't go to the wha. Especially with the dismal state of detroit and chicago(more mediocre then dismal) in the 70's.



Unless we live in some type of super alternate reality where Hull, instead of signing with the Jets gets traded to the Bruins and gets to play with Espo and Orr, but that's really getting into fantasy land.

 

[DannyGallivan]

As usual, this kind of speculative thread has turned into the predictable "let's fantasize every possible way to demean Gretzky's achievements by giving all the benefits to everyone else".

Mario Lemieux erasing any of Gretzky's significant season/career records? I don't see it

This is absolutely no attack on Gretzky or his achievements. Sometimes, I think, people just forget (or overlook) just how incredible and dominant Lemieux was. Maybe it's because he set his records in Pittsburgh instead of Edmonton, who knows. The guy was more than amazing. They both were.

Imagine if the played on the same line for an entire season (like they did during the last part of the '87 Canada Cups). 100 goals for Lemieux? 200 assists for Gretzky? Would would be the lucky other winger, or would it even matter? Maybe whatever team they were on would play with three defensemen and just let those two go up the ice.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

Has to be the biggest one mentioned so far.

Stuff like Orr/Lemieux/Crosby being healthier doesn't really change history, per se. Maybe more career stats and an extra championship for the respective franchise, but it's not like they retired at age 22 or something and we never knew what they could have done.

Gordie Howe on the Rangers legitimately alters the course of NHL history. Detroit is still a great team in the 1950's, but are they great enough to win multiple Cups? Does Montreal fill that vacuum and go Boston Celtics 8 or 9 in a row? Or is a Rangers team with Howe able to win Cups in the 50's? Do the Rangers become a complete disaster throughout the 60's? Probably not, but now there's a chance the Red Wings do. Could that post-expansion Rangers team with Ratelle and Park emerging have won a Cup with an old, but still elite Gordie Howe in the fold? Does hockey become a major sport in the US decades earlier if the game's greatest star was on Broadway?

What if Gretzky had to enter the NHL draft in 1980?

The Canadiens had the #1 pick...

 

[DannyGallivan]

The Canada Cups were quite different from the 1972 series, since all the games were played in Canada (or USA). While the Canada Cup was the closest thing to a genuine best-on-best tournament hockey had to offer, you can hardly compare it to 1972. Frankly speaking, if the 1987 CC, for example, had been played in the Soviet Union/Europe, USSR would have won clearly imo. In 1984 probably too.

You offer nothing to bolster your claim.
Fact: Canada was still a "thrown together team" against the very best Soviet team that was a cohesive unit for a long time.
Fact: In 1972, Canada didn't have a "home city" they were in hotels for the entire series. At least the Soviets all stayed in Moscow... where Canada made it's big comeback when circumstances greatly favoured the Soviets.
Fact: Canada not only had to fend off the pesky Soviets, but they also had to beat the best the other countries had to offer. Comrades often like to forget how good the Czechs were in the 70's.

 

[bobholly39]

As usual, this kind of speculative thread has turned into the predictable "let's fantasize every possible way to demean Gretzky's achievements by giving all the benefits to everyone else".

Mario Lemieux erasing any of Gretzky's significant season/career records? I don't see it.

First of all, Mario enjoyed fine health and a team that actually told him "you don't have to play defense" (according to Mario himself) for his first 5.5 years in the League. How many of Gretzky's records fell, or were approached, during this time of Mario's full strength? One: most short-handed goals in a season. Full marks to Mario for that one, but it hardly made anyone forget Wayne. Here's how the two players compare after 6 seasons:

Mario: 1.96 PPG: 345G + 493A = 838PTS (+17)
Wayne: 2.37 PPG: 429G + 693A = 1122PTS (+374)

I mean, right off the first six years, Mario is already 84 goals and almost 300 points behind Gretz. That is a lot of ground to make up before he passes his prime, which likely occurs -- even if he's in perfect health -- about six or seven years later.

Second, the only season in which Mario seriously threatened any Gretzky season records (by pace) is 1992-93, the "easiest" season ever for top-line players to rack up points, during which Mario played on a better, more dominant team than he'd ever played for before or would play for again (meaning: this kind of scenario would not re-occur for him, regardless of his health). His per-game stats that (60-game) season are highly inflated by the ridiculous hot-streak he was on at the end of the Pens' season, when they went 18 games undefeated and he scored a bazillion goals. But in the playoffs, after scoring 4 points in game one, he then scored 14 in the next 10, to close out the season. He simply was not going to maintain that pace.

Lemieux after 1993 is tricky, because of lingering back-issues and, I think, some confidence issues after his cancer scare. It would have been nice to see him play every year and dominate with his amazing skill, but playing enough to break Gretzky's records...? I mean, this is the guy -- the 6'4'', 230 lb. guy, mind -- who quit pro-hockey because it was too hard, and preferred golfing to representing his country.

__________

I would have loved it if Orr could have stayed a Bruin until well into Ray Bourque's era, say until 1984 or something. But I have this feeling that if he'd been in Chicago, still in health, from 1976 to 1984 or something, he'd have been a 85 point, +20 kind of defenseman who'd have made the All Star team regularly, but not the 1st position, and would have been on some bad losing teams. (We may have had to suffer the indignity of Randy Carlyle winning a Norris over Orr...)

It's like I said to you in the other thread. You always get super defensive in any comparison between the 2.

Looking at their first 6 years is great and all - but considering Lemieux had a much slower start than Gretzky it doesn't really do much except skew things in Gretzky's favor. The premise in any of these discussions is never "Lemieux would have outscored Gretzky from day 1". Because he wouldn't have and i've never seen anyone say otherwise. Gretzky started out his career better than almost anyone in the history of the sport (Bourque/Crosby top 3 with him imo).

Lemieux only reached his best level by 88 and 89. If you want to compare gretzky's best to lemieux's best, stop using Lemieux's first few seasons, and instead look at him at his best, which was after 88.

92-93 was a very high scoring year, sure. But so were many years in the 80s, that weren't far off. It's also not the only year he approached Gretzky, as he did in 89. Now you could be right and say "well only 2 seasons isn't much" - but that's precisely the point of this thread. Lemieux was at his best in 89 until approx 96 let's say.

Full season 89. 60 games in 93. nowhere close to full season outside of that, till 96. Had Lemieux been fully healthy, in 1990, 91, 92, 94 and 95 he likely would have played at levels that approached his performances from 89 and 93.

Would he have done it every single reason, as consistently as Gretzky did when he hit 200 season after season? Who knows - but i don't think he would have myself. But to pretend that he wouldn't have been able to get near that level in ANY of those seasons is just as ridiculous. So yeah - give Lemieux full health during that stretch and odds are he approaches that 200+ point and 80/90 goal pace again, and in a perfect storm maybe he even surpasses one or both.

The two records Lemieux would 100% have in my estimation are most career goals, and more career art rosses.

 

[DannyGallivan]

What if Gretzky had to enter the NHL draft in 1980?

The Canadiens had the #1 pick...

They would have picked Wickenheiser.
So, Gretzky would have fallen to the Jets. Who would have still picked Babych cuz he was so big and strong.
Gretzky would have went third... to the Blackhawks.

 

[DannyGallivan]

what if Bobby hull and Gordie howe never have jumped to WHA??. Would gretzky still be the number goal scorer/points man in NHL history?. if we assume that Howe and Hull puts the same amount of points in NHL that what they put up in WHA in 70s.

Gordie would never have come out of retirement if not for the WHA. He came back to play with his sons, something that wasn't being offered in the NHL.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Oh really now?

The question was whether Canada would have blown out USSR in 1972 with Orr and Hull, and I say that they wouldn't have - at least if the Soviet Union, and not only Canada, is allowed to have those "what ifs" too.

Well, I am being generous. I was speaking historically. Right now the USA has overtaken Russia for the number two spot IMO.