If Lemieux and Gretzky had played in the same amount of games... Perfect analysis!

[mcphee]

While I applaud your efforts in this holy crusade, the individual's ambition can't be factored in. I don't think Lemieux would've kept the pace up for as many 80 game seasons because despite his talent, which is obviously second to none, I don't think the same things fueled him that did Gretzky. I've never had the impression that leaving a legacy as the greatest there ever was, mattered to him as much. I can't prove that but extrapolating numbers isn't exact either. Since, the greatest ever is so subjective, I just say Gretzky's accomplishments are the best ever. Picking the greatest player gets more like art appreciation.

 

[soulok*]

Actually that would make me a genius cuz Gretzky's points per game average is BETTER then Lemieux 's.....GENIUS. Funny part is He's career average is still higher then Lemieuxs and Lemieuxs played 500 less games. Theres absolutely nothing Lemieux has that Gretzky doesnt better. Even Waynes goals per game average WAS higher then Mario's in his first 900 games. Mario's best season points per game wise is behind 2 of Waynes best seasons. Not 1 but 2. Gretzky holds 4 of the top 5 points per game season averages ... Was far more dominant in the playoffs. Lemieux might have owned the best physical talent. But if u had put mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky in their primes on the same line on the same team Wayne would lead that team in scoring. Theres absolutely no doubt about it.

 

[balddog66]

The other Mario arguement is also his lack of linemates for the first 5-6 years of his career. While wayne had great players like Coffey, Messier, Anderson, Kurri and Semenko (lol) to play off of.
While Mario missed a ton of games injured, he also played a ton of games injured. Ever read any old interviews with teammates, they usually say something like this.."Mario isn't a vocal leader, he leads by example, and when you see the pain he endures when putting on his skates from his chronic back pain, it makes you want to play that much harder." I know there was a time he couldn't even put his skates on himself...When you've tried playing hockey with an injured back, it certainly puts how important your back is into perspective...lol

 

[VanIslander]

if u had put mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky in their primes on the same line on the same team Wayne would lead that team in scoring. Theres absolutely no doubt about it.

I totally agree. Largely due to assists and powerplay points.

Lemieux would obviously be a winger, and likely score more goals, and - damn - even a twelve year old could get thirty points a season on that line!

 

[JCD]

Are you saying Wayne wasn't a leader or didn't play through injuries?

 

[#66]

The other Mario arguement is also his lack of linemates for the first 5-6 years of his career. While wayne had great players like Coffey, Messier, Anderson, Kurri and Semenko (lol) to play off of.
While Mario missed a ton of games injured, he also played a ton of games injured. Ever read any old interviews with teammates, they usually say something like this.."Mario isn't a vocal leader, he leads by example, and when you see the pain he endures when putting on his skates from his chronic back pain, it makes you want to play that much harder." I know there was a time he couldn't even put his skates on himself...When you've tried playing hockey with an injured back, it certainly puts how important your back is into perspective...lol

Thank god someone said it. The guy scored 199 points with Bob Errey and Rob Brown in the Wales.

That being said my pick for best ever is Bobby Orr. Everyone will have their own pick and who's to say who's right. "What if's" can factor in on alot of players. What if Orr came along when teams knew how to defend against a rushing defenseman? What if Beliveau and Richard played on the same line? What if Bossy had played for 15 years on a team that wasn't just rolling the lines? What if Frank Mahovlich played for anyone but Imlach?

Like mcphee said, the greatest ever is just to subjective.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

It's a well known fact that had Mario had a healthy career he'd have more goals and assists than Gretzky.

If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle. Gretzky's durability is an asset that he possesed.

 

[balddog66]

I never said anything about Gretzky actually...but to say durability is an asset is like saying luck is an asset...it's generally not the players choice whether they get injured or not, it's luck of the draw...(you could argue the style of play leads to some injuries...Wendel Clark) Pure and simply, Gretzky does not have the skill to stay away from injuries (other than Suters play) just had the luck his whole career.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

The other Mario arguement is also his lack of linemates for the first 5-6 years of his career. While wayne had great players like Coffey, Messier, Anderson, Kurri and Semenko (lol) to play off of.
While Mario missed a ton of games injured, he also played a ton of games injured. Ever read any old interviews with teammates, they usually say something like this.."Mario isn't a vocal leader, he leads by example, and when you see the pain he endures when putting on his skates from his chronic back pain, it makes you want to play that much harder." I know there was a time he couldn't even put his skates on himself...When you've tried playing hockey with an injured back, it certainly puts how important your back is into perspective...lol

OK, for the last time, Gretzky di not play on a line with Messier or Anderson. He played Kurri and whichever half ass chump Sather could put in there with him...

Again, Wayne played every game after the 91' Canada Cup injured and as the years went by, the pain increased yet he was still successful. 90 points in 98' with Graves and Mclean who were both bad while his back was in huge amounts of pain. The back is huge. If Wayne hadn't hurt it, he would have 3000+ points with ease and we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

[JCD]

I never said anything about Gretzky actually...but to say durability is an asset is like saying luck is an asset...it's generally not the players choice whether they get injured or not, it's luck of the draw...(you could argue the style of play leads to some injuries...Wendel Clark) Pure and simply, Gretzky does not have the skill to stay away from injuries (other than Suters play) just had the luck his whole career.

That is bullcrap. Gretzky was one of the toughest players in the league to check. He was slippery as heck on the ice. Defenders were reluctant to go after him (no, not just because of Semenko), but because he would make you miss more often than not, then be in the clear to torment your goalie.

That was skill. Not luck.

 

[BrettNYR]

:lol

What's so funny?

 

[VanIslander]

OK, for the last time, Gretzky di not play on a line with Messier or Anderson. He played Kurri and whichever half ass chump Sather could put in there with him...

I too am amazed at how many don't seem to know that. Must be from guys just old enough to have seen Lemieux win a Cup but too young to have seen Gretzky do so!

As for the Semenko argument, it's hollow as hell if you've seen the playoffs. "Try to stop Gretzky" became the defensive mantra of opponents round after round, year after year, to no avail as Wayne became the top goal scorer in NHL playoff history.

As someone said, he could deke a check, and if two guys came at him he'd manage to make a perfect pass to an open teammate. If you didn't see him in the playoffs, you shouldn't be slagging him or comparing him to Lemieux in terms of ability.

And anyone who thinks Gretzky wasn't a phenomenal leader has bigger pucks than stick.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

You couldn't check Wyane because he was reacting seconds before every other guy out there so once the defenders brain processes the check idea and he tries to do it, Wayne has already left the spot...

 

[ForsbergForever]

Again, Wayne played every game after the 91' Canada Cup injured and as the years went by, the pain increased yet he was still successful. 90 points in 98' with Graves and Mclean who were both bad while his back was in huge amounts of pain. The back is huge. If Wayne hadn't hurt it, he would have 3000+ points with ease and we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

I've heard a lot of people say this but would someone explain how one crosscheck created a dibilitating back condition that lasted for the rest of his career, if it was so bad shouldn't he have had some sort of surgery to correct the injury and rehabed it to get back to his high scoring ways? Also the whole Lemiex better than Gretzky arguement hinges on Lemieux never having any of the chronic back problems he experianced, a sort of injury-free card for his career. Thus if Lemieux was able to play 80 games per year for 20 years without having to miss time or play through pain, it is plausible to say he would have scored more points than Gretzky. That is the arguement, also, i'm pretty sure Lemieux had just as much desire to play as Gretzky, three comebacks don't happen if he doesn't love hockey.

 

[Sykie]

Ok here would be the stats of both Lemieux and Gretzky if they had played every game in every season. Also I've taken out Gretzky's 11th, 14th, 15th and 16th seasons as Lemieux didnt play in those.

Mario Lemieux:

1st year: 47 goals, 62 assists, 109 points
2nd year: 48 goals, 94 assists, 142 points
3rd year: 68 goals, 67 assists, 135 points
4th year: 72 goals, 102 assists, 172 points
5th year: 89 goals, 120 assists, 209 points
6th year: 61 goals, 105 assists, 166 points
7th year: 58 goals, 80 assists, 138 points
8th year: 55 goals, 109 assists, 164 points
9th year: 97 goals, 127 assists, 224 points
10th year: 64 goals, 77 assists, 141 points
12th year: 80 goals, 109 assists, 189 points
13th year: 53 goals, 78 assists, 131 points
17th year, 67 goals, 77 assists, 144 points
18th year: 20 goals, 85 assists, 105 points
19th year: 34 goals, 77 assits, 111 points
20th year: 8 goals, 65 assists, 73 points

Career Totals: 921 goals, 1422 assists, 2353 points

50 or more goal seasons: 11
100 or more assists seasons: 5
100 or more point seasons: 15
200 or more point seasons: 2

Wayne Gretzky:
1st year: 51 goals, 87 assists, 138 points
2nd year: 55 goals, 109 asssists, 164 points
3rd year: 92 goals, 120 assists, 212 points
4th year: 71 goals, 125 assists, 196 points
5th year: 94 goals, 127 assists, 221 points
6th year: 73 goals, 135 assists, 208 points
7th year: 52 goals.163 assists, 215 points
8th year: 62 goals, 122 assists. 184 points
9th year: 50 goals, 136 assists, 186 points
10th year: 55 goals, 116 assists, 171 points
12th year: 42 goals, 124 asssists, 166 points
13th year: 33 goals . 97 assists. 130 points
17th year: 23 goals, 80 assists, 103 points
18th year: 25 goals. 72 assists, 97 points
19th year: 23 goals, 67 assists, 90 points
20th year: 10 goals, 62 assists, 72 points

Career Totals: 811 goals, 1742 assists, 2553 points

50 or more goals seasons: 10
100 or more assists seasons: 10
100 or more point seasons: 13
200 or more point seasons: 4

So if you look at it, Lemieux clearly owns Gretzky in number of career goals, would've had 1 more 50 or more goal season as well as 2 more 100 or more point seasons. Gretzky owns Lemieux in assists as he would've had 5 more 100 or more assists seasons. Lemieux and Gretzky would also have been tied in number of art ross trophies with 8 each. Gretzky would've been third in goal scoring while Lemieux would've been first. Gretzky would still been first in assists and points though. Oh and Lemieux would've had the record for most points and goals in a single season. Gretzky would still have had the record for most assists. Pretty interesting, thoughts?

Well you forgot an important point, it's a proven fact the more you play, the harder it will be to keep a high ppg percentage. 30 points in 30 games certainly doesn't mean 80 points in 80 games, since it's way easier to shine over short periods of time than over an entire season.

So your numbers are inflated, widely inflated, and you're far away from a 'perfect analysis'... things are just not working that way. You can substract at least 10% of the 'projected' numbers you gave, and I'm very generous.

 

[dawgbone]

I've heard a lot of people say this but would someone explain how one crosscheck created a dibilitating back condition that lasted for the rest of his career, if it was so bad shouldn't he have had some sort of surgery to correct the injury and rehabed it to get back to his high scoring ways?

All it takes is one hit. Most people who hurt their backs once are never the same again. Gretzky used to live off his slapshot, but he could barely get it away anymore after about 1994 or so.

Also the whole Lemiex better than Gretzky arguement hinges on Lemieux never having any of the chronic back problems he experianced, a sort of injury-free card for his career. Thus if Lemieux was able to play 80 games per year for 20 years without having to miss time or play through pain, it is plausible to say he would have scored more points than Gretzky. That is the arguement, also, i'm pretty sure Lemieux had just as much desire to play as Gretzky, three comebacks don't happen if he doesn't love hockey.

And maybe if Lemieux had been anywhere near the same shape then (as a 22 year old) as he has been in recent years, he might have been able to have a long and healthy career.

Three comebacks might also have happened because he was owed a crap load of money as well... not necessarily for the love of the game (not saying that is fact, but it's a possibility).

 

[tom_servo]

Actually that would make me a genius cuz Gretzky's points per game average is BETTER then Lemieux 's.....GENIUS.

And that's reflected in the results. Gretzky ends up with more total points in Kovalev's post. Duh.

Funny part is He's career average is still higher then Lemieuxs and Lemieuxs played 500 less games.

That's true. But one could argue that Lemieux has spent more time in the dead-puck era.

Theres absolutely nothing Lemieux has that Gretzky doesnt better. Even Waynes goals per game average WAS higher then Mario's in his first 900 games. Mario's best season points per game wise is behind 2 of Waynes best seasons. Not 1 but 2. Gretzky holds 4 of the top 5 points per game season averages

All true. And it's all reflected in Kovalev's original post. So what?

Was far more dominant in the playoffs.

1.83 points per game compared to 1.6... that's not far more dominant. Both won two Conn Smythe trophies, as well.

Lemieux might have owned the best physical talent. But if u had put mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky in their primes on the same line on the same team Wayne would lead that team in scoring. Theres absolutely no doubt about it.

No doubt about it. Sure.

 

[tom_servo]

If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle. Gretzky's durability is an asset that he possesed.

Durability is largely a product of luck. No amount of training will prevent a bad back.

 

[thedjpd]

Durability is largely a product of luck. No amount of training will prevent a bad back.

God thank you.

It's easy for people to say that "this player is injury prone" and completely ignore the fact that while you can train hard, and stay in good shape, that only reduces your chance of injury, not eliminates it. And only some injuries at that. Luck most definitely is a big part of it.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

the main thing that sucks about lemieux's career, was by the time his team was stacked he started missing serious time. by 1990 he had his first back injury. if you watch old games, he was actually better when he was 21-24 than when he was 24-28. from 1991-1997, what should have been his prime, he missed huge amounts of time with a really bad back, hodgkins/radiation, and fatigue. he pretty much missed all of 1991, 1994, and 1995. then he also sat out from age 31-35, where he likely would have accumulated 500 pts. in the end i don't think his numbers would be quite as good as gretzky, but i think he would have finished around 2600 or so points. not bad.

 

[monkey_00*]

Well no I didnt prove myself wrong because Lemieux has the better of Gretzky in goal scoring and Gretzky has the better of Lemieux in assists.

KOVALEV10.........

If Lemieux was as healthy as Gretzky was in his career I would pick Lemieux over #99 to play on my team.......I agree with your assessment when you say Lemieux would have had more goals but Gretzky would have had more assists HOWEVER in Total points I think that Gretzky would still edge out Lemieux because of his assists........but as it stands now Gretzky had the better overall career..........as well; "should have, could have, and would have" just doesn't cut it........as it stands now Gretzky had the better overall career numbers and the better health on his side too.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

KOVALEV10.........

If Lemieux was as healthy as Gretzky was in his career I would pick Lemieux over #99 to play on my team.......I agree with your assessment when you say Lemieux would have had more goals but Gretzky would have had more assists HOWEVER in Total points I think that Gretzky would still edge out Lemieux because of his assists........but as it stands now Gretzky had the better overall career..........as well; "should have, could have, and would have" just doesn't cut it........as it stands now Gretzky had the better overall career numbers and the better health on his side too.

So what?

Let's not forget that Wayne also spent plenty of time in the dead puck era and more importantly played more games past his prime when his back was just as bad as Mario's...

 

[#66]

So what?

Let's not forget that Wayne also spent plenty of time in the dead puck era and more importantly played more games past his prime when his back was just as bad as Mario's...

You've got to be kidding me. Back in 1990, Lemieux was diagnosed with a hernia, a cracked vertebra, and an infection that would eat away at the spine. People forget the retirement talk back then and the doctors saying he was in the shape of a pro football lineman. Plus this came as the Pens were building a team around him and pretty much his prime years. IMO he was at his best in 88 and 89 playing with Coffey and a few glorified 3rd liners. Even though his recognition came in the 90's and he had some great years, he didn't even come close to playing the way he did pre back injury.

 

[AgentOrange*]

But is he the best ever? When you do this same procedure for Mike Bossy, he's got over 600 goals in his 10 seasons... nearly as many as Lemieux in the same stretch. Could he score 350 goals in 6 more seasons or would he have dropped off? Mario didn't drop off much until the last few years.

If we could have Lemieux and Bossy at 100% health, the race for ''greatest goal scorer ever'' would be pretty wild.

You must be counting playoff goals as Bossy finished with 573 regular season goals.

IMO, Bossy would've gotten to Howe's 801 goals before Gretzky. But then he also started his career earlier.

Oh, this isnt the "what if" thread.

 

[Jaysfanatic*]

The thing with Lemieux's goals over Gretzky's is that his were always prettier than Waynes, you look at the milestone goals that Wayne potted, it was due to the fact that he was right place, right time, take goal # 802 for example, wide open net, McLean was out of it. 50 in 39 empty netter......it's funny, there's no denying that Wayne was a great goal scorer, but he did it with smarts, not with pure skill like Mario's goals.