Lemieux/Crosby vs Howe/Ovechkin with a caveat

Which pair of players would you take


  • Total voters
    86
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

slapKing

Registered User
Feb 12, 2020
702
814
Canada
For this post, you get to choose which pair of players you would take for the next 10 years.

For the sake of argument, each player gets the same level of training, equipment, nutrition, medicine etc.

Now here's the caveat. The first pair has obviously missed more time compared to the second pair in real time, and if I didn't specify this part, it would confuse others on who to vote, so here it is.

While the second pair plays all the 82 games each year for the next 10 years, the first pair only play 72 games each year for the next 10 years.

In other words:
First pair: (72 games * 10 seasons) + (72 games * 10 seasons) = 1440 total games
Second pair: (82 games * 10 seasons) + (82 games * 10 seasons) = 1640 total games

So given the data, which pair of players would you take for the next 10 years.
 

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
21,951
13,920
Howe and OV would take Mario and Sid behind the woodshed, and literally beat the crap out of them. On the ice though ...???
 

Video Nasty

Registered User
Mar 12, 2017
4,544
7,776
Unless Gretzky is on the other side of the question, I always take the choice with Lemieux.

Interesting question though. There is merit to having two elite talents like Howe and Ovechkin who you can count on year in and year out to play the games. That kind of stability is incredibly valuable.

It's close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slapKing

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,588
Honestly Lemieux/Crosby playing 72 games vs 82 games doesn't even register as a consideration for me. A team with those 2 centers is making the playoffs - and once there, they' do great. 10 games missed will have no impact.

Lemieux and Crosby both suffered a lot during their primes due to heavy injuries. Full seasons, or half seasons missed. If you sprinkle some of that in there - maybe you go in the other direction. But at 72 games a piece that's actually pretty amazing for them, and an easy choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slapKing

Video Nasty

Registered User
Mar 12, 2017
4,544
7,776
Honestly Lemieux/Crosby playing 72 games vs 82 games doesn't even register as a consideration for me. A team with those 2 centers is making the playoffs - and once there, they' do great. 10 games missed will have no impact.

Lemieux and Crosby both suffered a lot during their primes due to heavy injuries. Full seasons, or half seasons missed. If you sprinkle some of that in there - maybe you go in the other direction. But at 72 games a piece that's actually pretty amazing for them, and an easy choice.

Good post.

I think the results would be a little more balanced if it was 62 games versus 72. Crosby has played the equivalent of 68/82 for his career while Lemieux’s is 56/82 (I’m not sure if I’m being fair in calculating this, which factors in him stepping away for the entire 1994-1995 48 game season).

72 games is a good deal for them. Each missing a quarter of the season on average (62 games played) would make me think twice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons

nowhereman

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
9,230
7,564
Los Angeles
Easily the centers, as they are the better players and play the more impactful position. As long as they're healthy for the playoffs, those ten missed games wouldn't matter all that much.
 

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
24,540
13,832
Vancouver
Is the first duo healthy in the playoffs? Because that's all that really matters when you have guys this good
 

Alexander the Gr8

Registered User
May 2, 2013
31,595
12,658
Toronto
Lemieux tips the scales far in the centers direction.

If you substitute him for Jagr or Yzerman, or replace Crosby with Malkin for example, then it would be a lot closer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slapKing

Bouboumaster

Registered User
Jul 4, 2014
9,498
7,258
Lemieux (Second best player of all time (or even GOAT, depending to who you ask) > Howe (Behind Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr IMO)> Crosby (I have him somewhere between 5 and 10)> Ovechkin (Between 10 and 15)

But even if it was Lemieux + Ovechkin vs Crosby + Howe, I'd still picked Lemieux's duo because of Lemieux. Lemieux was that f***ing impossibly good.
 

Perfect_Drug

Registered User
Mar 24, 2006
15,384
11,591
Montreal
I take Wingers if the games were played in the 60's/70's.

Centers in the modern game.


I don't know how Sid would react to Gordie elbowing him in the throat, while he knocks our Mario in a fight with no instigator.
 

SotasicA

Registered User
Aug 25, 2014
8,489
6,402
I would take the centers just because I don't want Ovechkin. Always hated him.
 

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
13,490
10,045
Lemieux (Second best player of all time (or even GOAT, depending to who you ask) > Howe (Behind Gretzky, Lemieux and Orr IMO)

Gordie Howe's career takes a giant dump all over Mario Lemieux's.

Calling Lemieux the greatest of all time is absurd. He was a distant second best in his own generation. Everything he did, Gretzky did it roughly equal or better, and far more often.
 

Bouboumaster

Registered User
Jul 4, 2014
9,498
7,258
Gordie Howe's career takes a giant dump all over Mario Lemieux's.

Calling Lemieux the greatest of all time is absurd. He was a distant second best in his own generation. Everything he did, Gretzky did it roughly equal or better, and far more often.

Cool story bro, except that we don't give a rat ass about the lenght of the career in this poll. At 72 games per seasons, every seasons, Lemieux would roll Howe and smoke him.

And Gretzky was the greatest at one thing (dexterity), but I'd argue that Lemieux was overall, more talented.
I still have Gretzky at #1 because his point total is undeniable, and his dexterity was about as superhuman as it can get, but let's not pretend like Lemieux was far behind in talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
13,490
10,045
Cool story bro, except that we don't give a rat ass about the lenght of the career in this poll. At 72 games per seasons, every seasons, Lemieux would roll Howe and smoke him.

He absolutely wouldn't though. You don't comprehend the history of Howe's dominance. Maybe you should read up on it.
 

Bouboumaster

Registered User
Jul 4, 2014
9,498
7,258
He absolutely wouldn't though. You don't comprehend the history of Howe's dominance. Maybe you should read up on it.

Yeah, he absolutly would left Ovechkin and even the Great Gordie Howe into the dust. If you're not named Wayne Gretzky, there's no competition.

I understand it, but I also understand (and watched) Lemieux just putting the entire league to shame.
I watched him then retire, and come back in the DPE, where he was still dominating.

The guy was superhuman.
 

JoVel

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2017
19,181
26,365
It's still the Pens duo. Who cares about 10 regular season games per season? You're making the playoffs unless your management is a joke.
 

slapKing

Registered User
Feb 12, 2020
702
814
Canada
Good post.

I think the results would be a little more balanced if it was 62 games versus 72. Crosby has played the equivalent of 68/82 for his career while Lemieux’s is 56/82 (I’m not sure if I’m being fair in calculating this, which factors in him stepping away for the entire 1994-1995 48 game season).

72 games is a good deal for them. Each missing a quarter of the season on average (62 games played) would make me think twice.

That's fair. Looking at the results, I should have removed more games for the Pens. I was initially thinking something like 60 games for the Pens pair vs the 82 games for the wingers, but I didn't do that because I thought that would definitely tip the scale for the wingers.

Looking at the poll results, I probably should have done that, something like 60-66 games played.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,588
That's fair. Looking at the results, I should have removed more games for the Pens. I was initially thinking something like 60 games for the Pens pair vs the 82 games for the wingers, but I didn't do that because I thought that would definitely tip the scale for the wingers.

Looking at the poll results, I probably should have done that, something like 60-66 games played.

For me personally - regular season games played wouldn't affect my answer. The issue with Lemieux or Crosby isn't that they only play 72, 62 or even 52 games in a year. I would take them if I got a guaranteed healthy 52 games in a season + the playoffs.

The issue with them is that they were never 100% health even in games played (Lemieux mostly) - and that there are many seasons where they played a whole lot less than 52 games.

A guaranteed 100% healthy Lemieux for 52 games a year for 10 straight seasons is an absolutely insane value, much, much greater than what he was in reality. He wasn't 100% healthy at any point in the 90s.

For Crosby - I don't know that he has that big an advantage that you take him above Ovechkin at 52 or even 62 games vs 82 - but I honestly might, if I get playoffs. Even at 50 games played a team centered by prime Lemieux/Crosby likely makes the playoff every single year - and if they're health come playoffs well that's what matters.

I think if you start saying Pens duo only play 70% or even 80% of playoff games vs 100% for Howe/Ovechkin - that's when you'll start seeing a lot more votes for the wingers.
 

slapKing

Registered User
Feb 12, 2020
702
814
Canada
For me personally - regular season games played wouldn't affect my answer. The issue with Lemieux or Crosby isn't that they only play 72, 62 or even 52 games in a year. I would take them if I got a guaranteed healthy 52 games in a season + the playoffs.

The issue with them is that they were never 100% health even in games played (Lemieux mostly) - and that there are many seasons where they played a whole lot less than 52 games.

A guaranteed 100% healthy Lemieux for 52 games a year for 10 straight seasons is an absolutely insane value, much, much greater than what he was in reality. He wasn't 100% healthy at any point in the 90s.

For Crosby - I don't know that he has that big an advantage that you take him above Ovechkin at 52 or even 62 games vs 82 - but I honestly might, if I get playoffs. Even at 50 games played a team centered by prime Lemieux/Crosby likely makes the playoff every single year - and if they're health come playoffs well that's what matters.

I think if you start saying Pens duo only play 70% or even 80% of playoff games vs 100% for Howe/Ovechkin - that's when you'll start seeing a lot more votes for the wingers.

Yeah, all good points. Especially the playoffs part. That would definitely even out the votes a bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->