McDavid in the 80s

[authentic]

How is it two different things? Presumably people who aren't even in the NHL would be less than average, yes? If less than average NHLers would beat Gretzky and Lemieux with today's equipment, is that not pretty much saying "Gretzky and Lemieux would be average or below average in today’s game "?

Not if they adapted to the league with the same training and technology which you left out. Not even close, especially Lemieux. Heck, 37 year old Lemieux with a few months training would put up points like Jagr did a few years back.

 

[authentic]

Oh I figured you were, my point was simply to emphasize what I consider the silliness of it. To me the only reasonable for such comparisons is to equal the playing fields across the board. Give Gretzky and Lemieux the same training opportunities and equipment McDavid has and see how it goes. Or something similar.....

Anyone watch the videos of today's NHLers trying wooden sticks?

Yes that's a much more interesting and better discussion, but no one really knows how that would go though and the ones who act like it's automatic they would score 150+ today are deluded IMHO. What we do know is that without changing anything on the ice, the best player is technically one of Crosby, Ovechkin or McDavid.

 

[authentic]

By being among the most elusive hockey player ever. He knew where everyone was on the ice, including his opponents, the ones trying to hit him. He was well known for being basically un-hittable.

Yeah he was elusive. I've also watched him play over 100 games and I could count the amount of times anyone even attempted to body check him. It kind of puts an asterisk next to his point totals along with the beer league level hockey (by todays standards) that he dominated.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

Yeah he was elusive. I've also watched him play over 100 games and I could count the amount of times anyone even attempted to body check him. It kind of puts an asterisk next to his point totals along with the beer league level hockey (by todays standards) that he dominated.

Terrible take. Any of the athletes you see playing today in the NHL would fair no better given the skates and sticks, goalie equipment they had to use in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Uneducated folks really underestimate the role technology plays in perceived player improvement.

 

[authentic]

Terrible take. Any of the athletes you see playing today in the NHL would fair no better given the skates and sticks, goalie equipment they had to use in the 70s, 80s and 90s. Uneducated folks really underestimate the role technology plays in perceived player improvement.

I call BS on that one. They would do no better? You can believe it if you want, I certainly don't. That would be true if equipment was the only thing that's improved.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

This is exactly what I am talking about. A very naive idea, that basically every day hockey players are getting better.

So, lets talk about "evolution" and "progress" of Jaromir Jagr.

So, you are saying, that at the age of 44-45 Jagr was better than Jagr at the age of 25.

So, what did Jagr improve in this 20 years?

When was he healthier? 25 or 45?
When was he faster?
When was he stronger?
When was he more skilled?
When was his head quicker?

So, in what way did he "evolve" to a better player? He learned how to skate properly maybe? Learned how to shoot right way? Learned how to stickhandle like the great McDavid?

So unless he recieved a blessing from the god of evolution, Charles Darwin the words about his alleged "evolution" are just an attempt to rationalize the fact, that evolved enlightened future supermen athletes were not able to keep up with 44 y.o Jagr.

PS Of course time doesn't stand still and everything is changing including hockey. And of course Jagr adjusted. But in no way does this mean he became a better player. He adjusted to his own physical weakening and to the changes in hockey and in equipment.

People are really uneducated when it comes to the advancements in hockey equipment and how it had effected the quality of play.

Goalies can now go to their knees all the time and get back up to their feet much quicker thanks to much lighter pads and that little flap of plastic/padding on the inside of their legs that ultimately means they will not bang up their knees into oblivion after a season of attempting butterflys.

Skates have seen such an advancement in the past few decades that players who would have been tortoises on blades in the 80s now appear to skate at a respectable level and speed. Same applies to pivoting on their skates...turning on a dime...changing direction.

Some people would have you believe that nearly 100% of the improvements we see from 2 or 3 decades ago are due to advancements in training, coaching, human evolution when these are the smallest factors.

 

[blueandgoldguy]

I call BS on that one. They would do no better? You can believe it if you want, I certainly don't. That would be true if equipment was the only thing that's improved.

There would only be marginally improvements from training and nutrition. Technology is by far the greatest factor in the improvement in play we see today. I would suggest you google a few videos on improvements in technology and how it had helped athletes beat world records and improve their performances in a variety of sports. Happy to help. Cheers!

 

[blueandgoldguy]

I mean I never watched 80s hockey since I wasn't even around back then, but why did the defense allow Gretzky get so close to the goalie without knocking him out cold? why do the players look so lazy and slow? goalies look small - probably the equipment. So many questions...

Players took longer shifts and it was not unusual for stars to be on the ice for 28 - 30 minutes rather than the 18 - 20 minutes we see today. It would only be natural to skate at a slower pace given the greater number of minutes of on-ice play...that and the inferior equipment which made it much more difficult to skate as fast and pivot as well as today's athletes

 

[blueandgoldguy]

I mean I never watched 80s hockey since I wasn't even around back then, but why did the defense allow Gretzky get so close to the goalie without knocking him out cold? why do the players look so lazy and slow? goalies look small - probably the equipment. So many questions...

Players took longer shifts and it was not unusual for stars to be on the ice for 28 - 30 minutes rather than the 18 - 20 minutes we see today. It would only be natural to skate at a slower pace given the greater number of minutes of on-ice play...that and the inferior equipment which made it much more difficult to skate as fast and pivot as well as today's athletes

 

[blueandgoldguy]

Other players of the time period also stated no one wanted to hit Gretzky how can you not like the guy? I watched a video last night and it had few Gretzky hits, most were weak outside of one Leafs rookie who ran him with his head down.

Gretz was protected and it was a bit obvious to see.

No incorrect. Players at the time stated they tried to hit Gretzky and they couldn't. He was too smart and elusive. That player you are referring to was one of the few who actually succeeded...that will happen when you take tens of thousands of shifts in your career.

Give Gretzky the technology that exists today - skates that allow average players to look like speed demons, and sticks that allow anyone to shoot a howitzer of the blade - and it's likely he averages 130 - 170 points in his prime...I might be a little low side with 130.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Either the best player of all time by a wide margin or very, very injured. No in between.

 

[authentic]

There would only be marginally improvements from training and nutrition. Technology is by far the greatest factor in the improvement in play we see today. I would suggest you google a few videos on improvements in technology and how it had helped athletes beat world records and improve their performances in a variety of sports. Happy to help. Cheers!

I've already stated in this thread they would be much worse if they had to use the old equipment, but that alone would not make McDavid worse than Gretzky. You can't be helped if you believe that. I'm confident McDavid would outskate Gretzky in 1950s skates.

 

[BM14]

He's out of the NHL in a few years because of all the huge hits and hard slashes he takes.

/thread

This. All it takes is one.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

The average player got better every decade. The average 90’s player was better than the average 80’s player. During the mid 90’s the game stated evolving even faster, there’s a big difference in the level of play between 1995 & 2000, 2000 & 05/06 and so on. If you don’t think hockey evolved at a rapid pace just go watch some games over the last 3 decades. The difference in talent & athleticism, time & space, speed & skill, is astonishing. McDavid would make a mockery of the league in the 80’s.

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

The average player got better every decade. The average 90’s player was better than the average 80’s player. During the mid 90’s the game stated evolving even faster, there’s a big difference in the level of play between 1995 & 2000, 2000 & 05/06 and so on. If you don’t think hockey evolved at a rapid pace just go watch some games over the last 3 decades. The difference in talent & athleticism, time & space, speed & skill, is astonishing. McDavid would make a mockery of the league in the 80’s.

If only Orson Welles had left the key to his machine around, we could find out. OTOH, put Gordie Howe on modern skates with a modern stick-how would he do in his prime?

 

[Thenameless]

He’s that kind of special. After he wins the next 10 art ross’ (assuming he stays healthy) what will the argument be against McDavid then? He only wins the art ross by 5 points so is it even really winning? Lol... I think majority of you just don’t really understand hockey like you claim to.

This is McDavid's fourth season in the NHL, and he's around 10 points behind the scoring leader (with others in between) in early December. By December, Gretzky was often 20-30 points clear of second place in his young, prime years. Are you sure that you're the one who really understands hockey?

 

[PittsburghPens8771]

This is McDavid's fourth season in the NHL, and he's around 10 points behind the scoring leader (with others in between) in early December. By December, Gretzky was often 20-30 points clear of second place in his young, prime years. Are you sure that you're the one who really understands hockey?

And that's different from the past 2 years how? He has close to no help on his entire roster. We all know by the end of the season he will clearly be in the lead for the art ross.

I don't care how many points Gretzky was clear of 2nd place in the 80's. It's a different game today.

 

[Dondini]

I dunno what Mcdavid would do in the 80s but if it was the 1910s he would defintely score 500 goals in the first 20 games then die from Influenza A

 

[Aceboogie]

He would have had only 50 career goals and 100 career points.

This ofcourse because he would have only played 20 games before the NHL banned him forever for being some type of mutant

For real though, McDavid would have absolutely destroyed the 80s. The D couldnt skate, and the league consisted of a ton of North Americans who only had roster spots because the league had so few foreign players. In was 80% AHL quality, 10% ok players, 10% stars

Oh and, in 30 years, there will be a 6'7 center who is faster than McDavid, with a shot like Ovechkin and vision like Crosby. He will be better than anything we see today. The entire league will be better. Progression

 

[Thenameless]

I don't care how many points Gretzky was clear of 2nd place in the 80's. It's a different game today.

What it shows is that he's not nearly as dominant a player as Gretzky is/was. He'd be incapable of producing Gretzky-like numbers in the 80's even with modern equipment. There's absolutely no way a fourth year Gretzky would be around 10 points behind another scorer in the first week of December in today's game.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

What it shows is that he's not nearly as dominant a player as Gretzky is/was. He'd be incapable of producing Gretzky-like numbers in the 80's even with modern equipment. There's absolutely no way a fourth year Gretzky would be around 10 points behind another scorer in the first week of December in today's game.

The average talent level has gone up so much that there will never be the level of seperation that Gretzky had in the 80’s. Hypothetically if using a rating from 1 to 100. Average talent level of players in the 80’s was 45, Gretzky was 81 = 36 point gap. Average talent level in the 90’s was 60, Lemieux was 86 = 26 point gap. Average talent level in 2000’s was 75, Crosby Ovechkin were 90 = 15 point gap. Average Talent level today is 82, McDavid is 92 = 10 point gap. The gap will continue to get smaller as the average player in the league gets better and better, there will never be seperation like Gretzky or Lemieux had against their peers.

 

[Thenameless]

The average talent level has gone up so much that there will never be the level of seperation that Gretzky had in the 80’s. Hypothetically if using a rating from 1 to 100. Average talent level of players in the 80’s was 45, Gretzky was 80 = 35 point gap. Average talent level in the 90’s was 60, Lemieux was 85 = 25 point gap. Average talent level in 2000’s was 75, Crosby Ovechkin were 90 = 15 point gap. Average Talent level today is 82, McDavid is 92 = 10 point gap. The gap will continue to get smaller as the average player in the league gets better and better, there will never be seperation like Gretzky or Lemieux had against their peers.

I agree in principle, but not with the raw numbers used in the example. Keep the average level of talent in the different eras if you'd like. McDavid is a 95, and Gretzky/Lemieux are more like 97 or 98, hence the massive gaps that occurred. The average player wasn't as good in the 80's, PLUS Gretzky and Lemieux are still considerably superior to McDavid.

 

[PittsburghPens8771]

What it shows is that he's not nearly as dominant a player as Gretzky is/was. He'd be incapable of producing Gretzky-like numbers in the 80's even with modern equipment. There's absolutely no way a fourth year Gretzky would be around 10 points behind another scorer in the first week of December in today's game.

It doesn’t show that. You can’t compare era’s in a sport like hockey. I don’t care if you keep pretending to yourself that your opinion is a fact.

 

[Thenameless]

It doesn’t show that. You can’t compare era’s in a sport like hockey. I don’t care if you keep pretending to yourself that your opinion is a fact.

You want some facts?

In his fourth year as a pro, Gretzky scored 92 goals, 120 assists, for 212 points. This is the year when he accomplished the legendary feat of scoring 50 goals in 39 games.

Adjust all you want in your modern era, modern equipment, modern training fantasy-land. Connor McDavid will be hard-pressed to even achieve half that number of goals/assists/points this season, and scoring is not twice as hard in this era.

I'm not saying Gretzky's stat line would be 92/120/212 had he been playing this season in 2018/2019, but I can tell you with certainty that he wouldn't be hovering around 10th place in scoring and around 10 points behind the leader by December 7th.

 

[authentic]

What it shows is that he's not nearly as dominant a player as Gretzky is/was. He'd be incapable of producing Gretzky-like numbers in the 80's even with modern equipment. There's absolutely no way a fourth year Gretzky would be around 10 points behind another scorer in the first week of December in today's game.

Dude, they are almost two different sports if you go back and watch 80s hockey. This is one of the most naive comments I've ever seen. You don't think he could match Gretzky in points even with today's equipment back then? Wow.

 

[Kranix]

He would dominate.