So you don't really read a sentence, glance at a stat, and then think you know it all. Then you throw some shade. Bemusing.
Here is some real history for you.
Coffey was traded in 87' because he didn't want to own an apartment building.
He only played 50 games that year as well as the next in Pittsburgh.
From 81 to 87 the two put up amazing numbers. 300+ points between the two of them. 200+ point seasons from Gretzky.
In 87' Coffey played less (50 games) and Gretzkys points dipped. He would never reach those Coffey heights again because he was gone.
In 88' Coffey played the same 50 games with Pittsburgh. Lemieux went from 110 points to 170 points. The next year Coffey was healthy and ran Lemieux up to 199 points.
Revisionist indeed. As I said before, the day they traded Coffey was the end of Gretzkys' dominance. It was a short sentence. It didn't take long to read. Your post says as much except for its conclusion and picked over facts.
People really underestimate the effect of a Paul Coffey. Especially those who never saw him play.
I stand by everything I wrote in my post above. You have convinced me of nothing.
I am a big Coffey fan, by the way, and I watched him regularly from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s.
As to your funny math, you are kind of overlooking a few obvious points:
-- Gretzky in 1981 had the highest-scoring season in NHL history (164 points, still eligible for Junior hockey) when Coffey was a 32-point rookie. Are you arguing it was Coffey who helped Gretzky jump from 137 to 164 points?
-- In 1983, Gretzky "declined" from 212 points to 196, while Coffey improved from 89 to 96. Where's the correlation?
-- You mention 1987 as if it was a sub-par Gretzky season, simply because he didn't score 200 points. In fact, that season he won the scoring title by the largest percentage of his entire career. He then had a 7 point game in the playoffs when Coffey was injured. (There is a
Sports Illustrated article -- you can Google it -- where the writer argues that 1987 was Gretzky's greatest-ever season.) Also, Gretzky had basically rested up and floated through the final 5 games of that season, getting ready for the playoffs and trying to overcome fatigue. (He scored 2 points and went -8 in the last five games.) Before those final five games of relaxing, Gretzky was pacing for 196 points, exactly the same as in 1983 when Coffey was healthy all year.
--
Most obviously: You're overlooking the rather huge fact that Gretzky's PPG
improved the first season after Coffey in Edmonton (1987-88). Even with Coffey playing 50-odd games in Pittsburgh, Gretzky would have won the scoring title without him.
Here were Wayne and Mario's numbers after 38 games each (when Gretzky went down to injury):
1. Gretzky 86
2. Lemieux 80
(That was after Mario had played maybe a dozen games with Coffey.)
Here were Wayne and Mario's numbers in each player's final 24 games:
1. Gretzky 56
2. Lemieux 56
(Lemieux played all his games with Coffey.)
So... care to revise your Thesis?
Look, Coffey was an amazing talent who clearly boosted the offence of all teams he played for in his prime. But it is simply not the case that a fully functioning Coffey was required for Gretzky or Lemieux to post huge seasons. Before Coffey cracked 90 points, Gretzky scored 212. And after Coffey was traded from Pittsburgh, Lemieux had his biggest per-game season (1992-93). And Gretzky's PPG improved the season after Coffey was traded.
Not sure why I'm pointing this out, as you'll no doubt willfully ignore these facts.
