Mark Messier

[mrhockey193195]

Saying Messier is a Ranger is akin to thinking of Gretzky as a King. If anyone thinks that they didn't see hockey in the 1980s. If you saw both eras you don't even need to ask.

Or if you are a Rangers fan. Most of us are pretty biased and consider Mess to be a Ranger.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

He was the face of the Rangers franchise for ten years, and most Ranger fans will cite him as the most important player in the franchise's history. Despite being credited by Kevin Lowe as the soul of the Oilers, he was overshadowed by some dude from Brantford for all but three seasons.

Personally, I see him as a Ranger, because it was in a New York uniform where he elevated himself from Mark Messier (the future first ballot HOFer) into MARK MESSIER (a reasonable franchise alternative to Wayne and Mario).

Doesn't really matter what Rangers fans might say. His 1989-1990 season was far better than any season he had in NY, and Gretzky was long gone.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Useless Bum - 6 Stanley Cups, 1 Conn Symthe, 2 Harts
Vancouver Canucks - 0 Stanley Cups, 0 Conn Smythe, 1 Hart

His time here was less than forgettable and that's being very charitable for all intensive purposes the previous poster had it right when he called Messier's Vancouver years.

For the record he is an Oiler IMO.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

I'm a die hard Rangers fan and I think he should be remembered as an Oiler who led NY to a very important championship.

Too many dominant seasons as an Oiler to remember

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Try to work out Chelios. 500 games 1 Cup 1 Norris, captain with Habs, 729 games 2 Norris with Hawks, home town team and captain as well, 681 games and 2 Cups with Detroit.

 

[mco543]

It's amazing that Chelios played so long he ended up putting in more seasons with Detroit than Chicago. I really don't know who I associate him with more, probably Detroit though, but I'm not entirely sure of my reasoning.

 

[JackSlater]

Try to work out Chelios. 500 games 1 Cup 1 Norris, captain with Habs, 729 games 2 Norris with Hawks, home town team and captain as well, 681 games and 2 Cups with Detroit.

Chicago. His peak was there and they enjoyed more of his prime years than any other team.

 

[Big Phil]

But that's subjective as well, of course if you watched hockey in 1985 your first impression of him would be one in an Oilers sweater so it'd stick and have automatic preference over the Rangers time. There's no non-subjective answer to the question really.

If we are asking an opinion question on how you view him then that's one thing. A Rangers fan born in 1980 will pick the Rangers because they don't know any better nor can I blame them. If it is a factual question along the lines of: "If he were to be inducted into the Hall of Fame and had to choose one sweater to wear" the answer is Oilers without a second guess.

12 mostly great seasons as an Oiler > 10 Seasons as a Ranger with 4 of them being horrendous

 

[Big Phil]

Try to work out Chelios. 500 games 1 Cup 1 Norris, captain with Habs, 729 games 2 Norris with Hawks, home town team and captain as well, 681 games and 2 Cups with Detroit.

Hmmm, good one. I guess I'd lean towards him as a Hawk. 9 seasons as a Hawk compared to 7 as a Hab and 10 as a Red Wing. He won Cups in Montreal and Detroit but never Chicago. Yet he was an all-star 7 seasons with 5 of them in a Blackhawks uniform. 2/3 of his Norrises are as a Hawk. Plus it isn't as if the Hawks didn't make a lot of noise in the postseason back then because they did and he was a big part of it. He was at his absolute peak as a Hawk so I'd have to pick them.............barely

 

[ecemleafs]

Saying Messier is a Ranger is akin to thinking of Gretzky as a King. If anyone thinks that they didn't see hockey in the 1980s. If you saw both eras you don't even need to ask.

not really. gretzky was THE guy on the oilers and the kings, but hes obviously considered an oiler because of how much success he had in edmonton. messier wasnt THE guy on the oilers because gretzky was there, but in NY messier was the captain and best player.

 

[begbeee]

not really. gretzky was THE guy on the oilers and the kings, but hes obviously considered an oiler because of how much success he had in edmonton. messier wasnt THE guy on the oilers because gretzky was there, but in NY messier was the captain and best player.

Messier WAS the guy on Oilers after Gretzky left. He led the team to Cup and he showed the world that Oilers team was not only Gretzky. Oh yeah, did I say he was a captain and their best player?

 

[fireworks]

Edmonton Oilers, but I could see how a younger person would think Rangers.

 

[Blades of Glory]

Chelios is definitely a Blackhawk, IMO. His accomplishments in Montreal don't quite measure up to what he did in Chicago after the Habs made that ill-fated decision to deal him. In Montreal, he won one Norris and was an important contributor on the 1986 Cup champions, while also being arguably Montreal's best player during the 1989 Cup Finals playoff run. But he was constantly beset by inconsistency, injuries, and other issues after that 1989 season, and was not always quite the player he could have been. The move to Chicago unleashed a monster. It started with that incredible 1992 playoff run, when he put that team on his back until they were simply over-matched against the Penguins in the Cup Finals. Of couse, he followed that with a ridiculous 1992-93 Norris season. Chelios' 1993 season was one of the greatest all-around performances by a defenseman in NHL history. I cannot fathom how he managed to lead the Hawks in shots, score 70+ points, and win the Norris in a season that he racked up 282 PIM. That is almost 5 full games worth of penalties.

 

[Elvis Presley]

stat wise obviously an oiler

but in new york, hes a ranger, and thats all that really matters to us.

 

[BamBamCam*]

Hmmm, good one. I guess I'd lean towards him as a Hawk. 9 seasons as a Hawk compared to 7 as a Hab and 10 as a Red Wing. He won Cups in Montreal and Detroit but never Chicago. Yet he was an all-star 7 seasons with 5 of them in a Blackhawks uniform. 2/3 of his Norrises are as a Hawk. Plus it isn't as if the Hawks didn't make a lot of noise in the postseason back then because they did and he was a big part of it. He was at his absolute peak as a Hawk so I'd have to pick them.............barely

I was going to adamantly disagree with you about Messier because I see him as a Ranger, I also have been watching/playing hockey since Orr skated with the B's so I fit into that category of watching before Messier ever laced them up but then someone dropped the Chelios name and I see Chelios as a Hab and not a Hawk negating whatever, I thought about Messier being a Ranger first.

But for ***** and giggles, Joe Namath was an average QB at best but he took the Jests to the promised land and did it with a prediction. If not for that Namath is a guy we never talk about. Same with Messier, he took the team from Gotham to the Cup after a prediction. Is there a bigger stage in pro sports than NYC? Messier put himself on bigger pedestal than he ever had in Edmonton. I think of the Oilers, I think of Wayne first, then the rest of the guys. I think of the Rangers and many names first but when I think of Messier, I picture him ending the greatest chant in all of the sports "1940" 1940" "1940"

But I am not sure how I can think that anymore after Chelios's name was dropped.

 

[Jamin]

I think more people would probably consider him a ranger based on 1994 which is sad because in Alberta he has a road named after him which unless im misinformed is not the case in New York

 

[Big Phil]

But for ***** and giggles, Joe Namath was an average QB at best but he took the Jests to the promised land and did it with a prediction. If not for that Namath is a guy we never talk about. Same with Messier, he took the team from Gotham to the Cup after a prediction. Is there a bigger stage in pro sports than NYC? Messier put himself on bigger pedestal than he ever had in Edmonton. I think of the Oilers, I think of Wayne first, then the rest of the guys. I think of the Rangers and many names first but when I think of Messier, I picture him ending the greatest chant in all of the sports "1940" 1940" "1940"

In comparison, Messier is a far better hockey player than Namath was a QB. I'll admit the New York thing elevates the legacy of a player. After all, the most famous predictions in sports are Babe Ruth's called shot, Namath and Messier's predictions. All NYC. Sinatra would be proud.

However if you isolate Messier's Edmonton career he is easily a HHOFer in those 12 years. First ballot for sure. So I think we'd still be talking about him with some reverance.

 

[BamBamCam*]

In comparison, Messier is a far better hockey player than Namath was a QB. I'll admit the New York thing elevates the legacy of a player. After all, the most famous predictions in sports are Babe Ruth's called shot, Namath and Messier's predictions. All NYC. Sinatra would be proud.

However if you isolate Messier's Edmonton career he is easily a HHOFer in those 12 years. First ballot for sure. So I think we'd still be talking about him with some reverance.

I am thinking me being an American influences my thoughts on Messier and New York and being a Bruin fan...Chelios

 

[blogofmike]

I was going to adamantly disagree with you about Messier because I see him as a Ranger, I also have been watching/playing hockey since Orr skated with the B's so I fit into that category of watching before Messier ever laced them up but then someone dropped the Chelios name and I see Chelios as a Hab and not a Hawk negating whatever, I thought about Messier being a Ranger first.

But for ***** and giggles, Joe Namath was an average QB at best but he took the Jests to the promised land and did it with a prediction. If not for that Namath is a guy we never talk about. Same with Messier, he took the team from Gotham to the Cup after a prediction. Is there a bigger stage in pro sports than NYC? Messier put himself on bigger pedestal than he ever had in Edmonton. I think of the Oilers, I think of Wayne first, then the rest of the guys. I think of the Rangers and many names first but when I think of Messier, I picture him ending the greatest chant in all of the sports "1940" 1940" "1940"

But I am not sure how I can think that anymore after Chelios's name was dropped.

I fully agree that the prediction and NY factor helps their place in the public consciousness.

Don't think Namath was "average at best" though. He was a 2-time AFL MVP. He was football's first 4000 yard passer and the only one to hit 4000 before the 1978 rule changes made passing easier and lengthened the schedule from 14 to 16 games.

 

[BamBamCam*]

I fully agree that the prediction and NY factor helps their place in the public consciousness.

Don't think Namath was "average at best" though. He was a 2-time AFL MVP. He was football's first 4000 yard passer and the only one to hit 4000 before the 1978 rule changes made passing easier and lengthened the schedule from 14 to 16 games.

Not to digress nor to sound like a wise azz but:

Are you we thinking of the same Joe Namath? He of the 173/220 TD/INT ratio? Of the 62-63-4 record as a starter? Of the career completion percentage of 50.1%? Of the career 65.5 passer rating? And while perhaps Namath would have had a better career despite his injury, the fact is the injury happened, his career numbers were pretty poor, and by no legitimate statistical measure can you say he was a legit HoF. Take away the story of Super Bowl III and his personality and it wouldn't even be up for discussion. And that is the problem with the HoF.

I've never heard anyone say Namath wasn't good because of his completion percentage. It's usually because of those interceptions that were too high even for his era. Not to mention having just two playoff appearances, a losing record as a starter, and he had little success post-merger (statistically one of the worst QBs in the league in 1970, 75, 76).

He had 5 post-merger seasons where he threw enough passes to officially qualify for efficiency stats.

1970 - 21st in comp. %, 9th in YPA, 27th in INT%, 27th in rating out of 31 passers
1972 - 18th in comp. %, 2nd in YPA, 23rd in INT%, 12th in rating out of 27 passers
1974 - 15th in comp. %, 8th in YPA, 24th in INT%, 12th in rating out of 32 passers
1975 - 25th in comp. %, 18th in YPA, 30th in INT%, 27th in rating out of 30 passers
1976 - 20th in comp. %, 30th in YPA, 29th in INT%, 29th in rating out of 31 passers

That's not HOF material there. I understand why he's in. The AFL part of his career was much better, and of course everything surrounding SB III.

Sorry, I know this is not hockey. I have these quoted because they are not my research analysis because this particular conversation about Broadway Joe comes up alot.

 

[Kirikanoir]

Useless Bum - 6 Stanley Cups, 1 Conn Symthe, 2 Harts
Vancouver Canucks - 0 Stanley Cups, 0 Conn Smythe, 1 Hart

As if I could give a flying leap what Mark Messier did for other teams. He was brought to Vancouver and paid a high salary to provide leadership and to help the team win. He did neither. Instead he did the opposite he was a cancer on the team and helped drag the franchise down in his three years here. So yes he was a useless overpaid bum in his time here.

And since we`re throwing out stats, how about this one. Last 7 years of Messier`s career, Playoff appearances 0.

 

[*Bob Richards*]

Even with the overall better stats, the 5 stanley cup rings, and the legendary team I believe he is a Ranger for lifting the city from its 54 year demon.

 

[SealsFan]

He'll always be a Cincinnati Stinger in my eyes...

 

[SealsFan]

As if I could give a flying leap what Mark Messier did for other teams. He was brought to Vancouver and paid a high salary to provide leadership and to help the team win. He did neither. Instead he did the opposite he was a cancer on the team and helped drag the franchise down in his three years here. So yes he was a useless overpaid bum in his time here.
[/B]

Can you elaborate on the specifics?

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

As if I could give a flying leap what Mark Messier did for other teams. He was brought to Vancouver and paid a high salary to provide leadership and to help the team win. He did neither. Instead he did the opposite he was a cancer on the team and helped drag the franchise down in his three years here. So yes he was a useless overpaid bum in his time here.

And since we`re throwing out stats, how about this one. Last 7 years of Messier`s career, Playoff appearances 0.

The moral of the story: Team's in decline shouldn't sign 37 year olds who are in decline to huge deals.

The blame for that fiasco is with management.