How does Prime Sergei Makarov compare to Gretzky and Lemieux?

[Riddum]

Unfortunately, his prime was before I was born so I didn't have a chance to watch him play.

Recently, I watched a documentary on the 1987 Canada cup, and I was blown away by the dude's skills and game. They called him the Soviet Gretzky (kind of Ironic, given Gretzky's family background lol).

My Dad told me he hated hockey... until he saw the Soviets play. My uncle told me the same.




Said documentary

Click to read more...

 

[sr edler]

They called him the Soviet Gretzky

Wasn't it Larionov who was called that? Makarov wasn't a center, but yeah his skillset was probably more like Gretzky's than Larionov's was. But I don't think anyone thinks he was as good as Gretzky or Lemieux.

Look at the numbers players like Peter Stastny & Kent Nilsson put up at best in the NHL in the 80s, 120–140ish points. Makarov was as skilled as them or even more so under the right circumstances [like a competent linemate] and if he played in the league from the start he probably would have put up similar numbers, or even around 150 points. I don't think its outlandish to say that, but who knows. I don't think he would have put up 150 points annually though, but perhaps at best.

 

[Reds4Life]

He's very close skill-wise overall. He's got a better wrist shot than Gretzky for sure. Makarov was extremely smart player. He never wasted a step.

However, Makarov was at his best only for a few years, and even though he remained very good player in his 30s, it just wasn't the same.

If you only considered prime years, there's not many players that come close to Sergei Makarov.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Wasn't it Larionov who was called that?

That was always my understanding. Here's a link among many.

 

[Sentinel]

No forward other than Howe (and possibly Beliveau) touches G and L. Makarov needs to be mentioned with the next tier of all time greats: Richard and Hull. At his prime (which lasted roughly a decade, during which he won nine scoring titles and 3 MVP awards in USSR), he was probably better than these two. He had everything: IQ, vision, pass, shot, speed, dribbling, quickness, and grit. Plus he was clutch.

Unfortunately fans of Canadian hockey history like to downgrade him. Oh, well.

 

[Riddum]

Watching the video above, Crosby reminds me of Makarov.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

At 31 years of age Makarov comes to the NHL and posts a respectable 86 point in 80 games with the Calgary Flames. He follows that up with 79 points in 78 games the next season. He was a respectable playoff performer posting 23 points in 34 career games.

At the same age (31) a herniated-disc/post-Gary-Suter Wayne Gretzky puts up 65 points in 45 games, and comes back from injury to post an astounding 40 points in 24 playoff games! He follows it up a year later (age 32) with 130 points in 81 games, and an Art Ross trophy to boot. And this was all after having lost a step due to injury/abuse and 15 years of playing about 90 - 100 games per year.

Sergei Makarov was a great Soviet hockey player, but he was no Wayne Gretzky. And I would imagine he would be the first to admit it.

In a way I dislike highlight reels. Yes they are fun to watch, but if you went only based on highlights alone you'd think Tomas Hertl, Nazem Kadri, and Rob Schremp were far greater players than Wayne Gretzky

Edit: I would appreciate if nobody would take that last line out of context .

 

[Rexor]

^^I don't think it's fair to compare his NHL production head-to-head with Gretzky, as the latter was born and raised in Canada, while Makarov came overseas, as you mentioned, at 31.

In a way I dislike highlight reels. Yes they are fun to watch, but if you went only based on highlights alone you'd think Tomas Hertl, Nazem Kadri, and Rob Schremp were far greater players than Wayne Gretzky

Well in this case, we will have to wait and see.

 

[Rhiessan71]

He doesn‘t.
He compares with Bossy, Trottier, Stastney ect ect.

People can continue to bring up all his Russian League scoring titles till they‘re blue in the face.
The FACT remains that he went from dominating the scoring race there to being just a top 30 scorer in the NHL a year later.

Adjusting to a new eviorment is all well and good but it‘s not nearly a good enough excuse for finishing behind Gartner in scoring if he was as good as what‘s being portrayed.

 

[BraveCanadian]

With all due respect to Makarov, he doesn't compare.

Wonderful skater, explosive, great talent.. but far short of Lemieux and Gretzky imo.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

We have enough sample size at the Canada Cups and other NHL vs CSKA games to know that Gretzky was much better than any Soviet player. Makarov vs Bossy is where it gets interesting

 

[Reds4Life]

We have enough sample size at the Canada Cups and other NHL vs CSKA games to know that Gretzky was much better than any Soviet player. Makarov vs Bossy is where it gets interesting

I disagree.

While 66 and 99 are much greater in an all-time sense, if strictly peak is considered, Makarov & Krutov were extremely close. The Canada Cup games demonstrate that perfectly.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I disagree.

While 66 and 99 are much greater in an all-time sense, if strictly peak is considered, Makarov & Krutov were extremely close. The Canada Cup games demonstrate that perfectly.

How do you figure?
Gretzky was above any Russian and Mario only played in ‘87 and he matched any Russian that year. Difference however, is that ‘87 was prior to Mario‘s peak.

So again, compare Makarov to any one and you have an argument. You do not have one to place Makarov with Gretz and Lemieux though. I‘m sorry, you don‘t.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I disagree.

While 66 and 99 are much greater in an all-time sense, if strictly peak is considered, Makarov & Krutov were extremely close. The Canada Cup games demonstrate that perfectly.

Oh come on.

Gretzky had 69 points in 39 Canada Cup games (1.77 PPG)
Makarov had 31 points in 22 Canada Cup games (1.40 PPG)
Krutov had 30 points in 22 Canada Cup games (1.36 PPG)

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

He doesn‘t.
He compares with Bossy, Trottier, Stastney ect ect.

People can continue to bring up all his Russian League scoring titles till they‘re blue in the face.
The FACT remains that he went from dominating the scoring race there to being just a top 30 scorer in the NHL a year later.

Adjusting to a new eviorment is all well and good but it‘s not nearly a good enough excuse for finishing behind Gartner in scoring if he was as good as what‘s being portrayed.

It can never be proven, but I think if Gretzky or Mario went to play in the Russian league at age 31, neither would come close to dominating like they did here either.

 

[Rhiessan71]

It can never be proven, but I think if Gretzky or Mario went to play in the Russian league at age 31, neither would come close to dominating like they did here either.

Well I don't think or believe that for a second.

 

[ot92s]

here's gretz and makarov as kids

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Well I don't think or believe that for a second.

Think about it for more than a second.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Who knows? It's super speculative because prime Makarov never played in a setting comparable to the NHL and a few Canada Cup games don't really provide enough data.

I think the suggestion he's near Gretzky or Lemieux is one that would have gotten you laughed out of the room anywhere outside the Soviet Union. As I've said before on here, the retroactive attempt by some (mostly prideful Russians but also some who overrate limited international exhibition series and Youtube videos) to create equivalence between Soviet hockey and NHL hockey is quite dubious.

 

[shazariahl]

I disagree.

While 66 and 99 are much greater in an all-time sense, if strictly peak is considered, Makarov & Krutov were extremely close. The Canada Cup games demonstrate that perfectly.

When did Makarov or Krutov ever come close to matching Gretzky's best few seasons? I consider Gretzky's strict peak to be 81-82 until 85-86. His 92 goals, 212 pt season is obviously among the best, but each of those seasons could be argued to be his best ever.

81-82 92 goals, 212 pts. Most goals ever in a season
82-83 196 pts, wins scoring race by a record 79 pts.
83-84 205 pts, 51 game point scoring streak, 1.77 PPG average. Was on pace to beat his own records for goals and points in a season.
84-85 208 pts in regular season, but 47 playoff points. 255 combined points, for most ever between regular season and playoffs. Also won basically everything imaginable.
85-86 215 pts, to beat his own records for points and assists in a season. 163 assists. Only Lemieux has ever had that many points in a year, let alone that many assists.

These were also while winning scoring races by 70+ points most seasons. Some of these seasons he had more assists than anyone else had points. He averaged over 200 pts/season during this stretch, something only Lemieux ever came close to doing even once. Is there an argument to put either Makarov or Krutov against that?

 

[Big Phil]

The Stastny comparison is nice. And it is nothing to be ashamed of for Makarov either. Stastny was 24 years old when he was a rookie in the NHL and he cracked 109 points. The following year he had 139. That was his peak while he still had several other 100+ point years.

What I use is not a perfect science, but when you consider the enormous gap between an all-time great like Stastny vs. Gretzky on a season vs. season basis then I think you can find a fair comparison for Makarov. It would be hard to imagine Makarov - or anyone else - getting 139+ points a year regularly. Bossy peaked at 147 and was still miles away. I would still put Bossy ahead of Makarov.

Mario in 1986 had 141 points. This is about a year before the 1987 Canada Cup. In that tournament I think Mario at LEAST performed as good as anyone in the KLM line (Gretzky of course was above everyone). Whatever you want to say, both Makarov and Lemieux played phenomenal and I wouldn't say one dominated the other. However, maybe give the slight edge to Mario. Anyway, this was just before Mario took off for good in the NHL and never looked back. No way could Makarov compete with a post-1987 Mario. With a 1987 Canada Cup Mario he didn't best him either. Mario had 141 points in 1986, then 107 points in 63 games in 1987. I guess what I am saying is that at the absolute best we would see Makarov do no better than 141 points in an NHL season at his peak, and that's a stretch. Stastny - who is his best comparable - never surpassed 139 and then never more than 124 after that.

I think that might paint a picture into where we may have seen Makarov. It would be hard to imagine him having a career better than Stastny. Stastny had the same NHL career - post 1989 - as Makarov basically. I realize Stastny had a decade of getting used to the NHL culture under his belt, but he was also a couple years older. So could we agree that Stastny is a good measure for the best Makarov may have done? (which is not a knock)

 

[Rhiessan71]

Think about it for more than a second.

I don't have to.
99 and 66 were well ahead of Makarov and even if they went over and played in Russia and were only 80% effective as they were in the NHL, they both would have walked away with the Russian scoring titles handily by larger margins than Makarov did.

The Stastny comparison is nice. And it is nothing to be ashamed of for Makarov either. Stastny was 24 years old when he was a rookie in the NHL and he cracked 109 points. The following year he had 139. That was his peak while he still had several other 100+ point years.

What I use is not a perfect science, but when you consider the enormous gap between an all-time great like Stastny vs. Gretzky on a season vs. season basis then I think you can find a fair comparison for Makarov. It would be hard to imagine Makarov - or anyone else - getting 139+ points a year regularly. Bossy peaked at 147 and was still miles away. I would still put Bossy ahead of Makarov.

Mario in 1986 had 141 points. This is about a year before the 1987 Canada Cup. In that tournament I think Mario at LEAST performed as good as anyone in the KLM line (Gretzky of course was above everyone). Whatever you want to say, both Makarov and Lemieux played phenomenal and I wouldn't say one dominated the other. However, maybe give the slight edge to Mario. Anyway, this was just before Mario took off for good in the NHL and never looked back. No way could Makarov compete with a post-1987 Mario. With a 1987 Canada Cup Mario he didn't best him either. Mario had 141 points in 1986, then 107 points in 63 games in 1987. I guess what I am saying is that at the absolute best we would see Makarov do no better than 141 points in an NHL season at his peak, and that's a stretch. Stastny - who is his best comparable - never surpassed 139 and then never more than 124 after that.

I think that might paint a picture into where we may have seen Makarov. It would be hard to imagine him having a career better than Stastny. Stastny had the same NHL career - post 1989 - as Makarov basically. I realize Stastny had a decade of getting used to the NHL culture under his belt, but he was also a couple years older. So could we agree that Stastny is a good measure for the best Makarov may have done? (which is not a knock)

Couldn't agree more.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

Who knows? It's super speculative because prime Makarov never played in a setting comparable to the NHL and a few Canada Cup games don't really provide enough data.

You are right, it is pure speculation. A thread like this will have its biased posters. However, its the constant pissing contest between some posters that annoys me. The arrogant, know it all attitude of some posters derails threads like these into an exercise of trying to discredit, humiliate and bully another poster they disagree with. The spirit of these forums/threads is for adult discussion. Post like Beliveau played hockey. Hard, skillful and respectful.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

One of the things one needs to keep in mind here is that Makarov came up in a vastly different system which had a very different incentive structure than Western hockey. It is quite possible Makarov had the natural talent to be as good as either Gretzky or Lemieux but Soviet hockey was not designed to maximize individual achievement. The objective was to form a cohesive collective that achieves its goals and those goals were primarily in the international arena.

The Soviet league was not structured to earn money, to be entertaining or to show off star players' individual skills. The way player allocation worked meant that if any entertainment or dazzling star player performances occurred it was more accidental than by design.

The Soviet system was beneficial to the Soviet team's international success as it allowed the Soviet Union's top players to form a unit whose cohesive nature would have been well beyond even the most settled NHL dynasty. But there is a case to be made that it actually hurt the development of the top players as individuals.

Makarov played his entire career up to the point of his move to Calgary on the most stacked team in a system that systematically made sure his team would be superior. As a result, he spent his 20s playing mostly against inferior opposition without being really challenged. There is no doubt, as any athlete will tell you, that constant challenge is required to maximize your potential. Makarov's true ceiling may never have been reached as his individual potential was stunted by a system that had little regard for individuals.

 

[Reds4Life]

How do you figure?
Gretzky was above any Russian and Mario only played in ‘87 and he matched any Russian that year. Difference however, is that ‘87 was prior to Mario‘s peak.

So again, compare Makarov to any one and you have an argument. You do not have one to place Makarov with Gretz and Lemieux though. I‘m sorry, you don‘t.

Oh come on.

Gretzky had 69 points in 39 Canada Cup games (1.77 PPG)
Makarov had 31 points in 22 Canada Cup games (1.40 PPG)
Krutov had 30 points in 22 Canada Cup games (1.36 PPG)

The Stastny comparison is nice. And it is nothing to be ashamed of for Makarov either. Stastny was 24 years old when he was a rookie in the NHL and he cracked 109 points. The following year he had 139. That was his peak while he still had several other 100+ point years.

What I use is not a perfect science, but when you consider the enormous gap between an all-time great like Stastny vs. Gretzky on a season vs. season basis then I think you can find a fair comparison for Makarov. It would be hard to imagine Makarov - or anyone else - getting 139+ points a year regularly. Bossy peaked at 147 and was still miles away. I would still put Bossy ahead of Makarov.

Mario in 1986 had 141 points. This is about a year before the 1987 Canada Cup. In that tournament I think Mario at LEAST performed as good as anyone in the KLM line (Gretzky of course was above everyone). Whatever you want to say, both Makarov and Lemieux played phenomenal and I wouldn't say one dominated the other. However, maybe give the slight edge to Mario. Anyway, this was just before Mario took off for good in the NHL and never looked back. No way could Makarov compete with a post-1987 Mario. With a 1987 Canada Cup Mario he didn't best him either. Mario had 141 points in 1986, then 107 points in 63 games in 1987. I guess what I am saying is that at the absolute best we would see Makarov do no better than 141 points in an NHL season at his peak, and that's a stretch. Stastny - who is his best comparable - never surpassed 139 and then never more than 124 after that.

I think that might paint a picture into where we may have seen Makarov. It would be hard to imagine him having a career better than Stastny. Stastny had the same NHL career - post 1989 - as Makarov basically. I realize Stastny had a decade of getting used to the NHL culture under his belt, but he was also a couple years older. So could we agree that Stastny is a good measure for the best Makarov may have done? (which is not a knock)

Makarov in particular was THE soviet player Czechoslovak coaches feared the most. That's a fact.

Just watching the 1987 Canada Cup finals tells you everything you need to know about Makarov. He was a phenomenal talent, almost keeping scoring pace with 66 and 99 despite having much worse support from defense and worse goalie as well. Krutov was an absolute beast in that final as well. He regularly made Raymond Bourque look like a pylon. It was just an amazing display of skills these two players had.

I am sorry, but comparing either Makarov or Krutov to Peter Stastny is an insult. Stastny wasn't even close to either one of the soviet greats. He had a much better NHL career though, so he is overrated by a lot of people, IMHO.

Of course, 66 and 99 are just flat out better/greater all things considered, but if you exclusively look at peak performance, Makarov & Krutov come very, very close to the two Hockey Gods.