Most Dominant athlete: Wayne Gretzky vs Wilt Chamberlain

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
It's easy to say that a rising tide lifts all ships, but Ruth outpaces his contemporaries by quite a margin. Others argue that Ruth was the start of the power hitting era. For instance, in 1929 the league average for home runs was 59 per team; the number that Ruth, himself, reached. If it was that easy for him, the others in his era didn't find it to be nearly as easy. It's hard to imagine just one player hitting more home runs than an entire team in any era.

There's nothing wrong with choosing Gordie Howe over Wayne Gretzky, because as you say, that's a personal preference. You need to remember though that Gretzky throughout his career had doubters because of his lack of an imposing physical presence. He still found a way to get it done at basically every level and on every stage.
 

simon bedford

Registered User
Dec 13, 2014
123
0
Gordie Howe never needed a team of Dave Lumleys and Semenkos and Callaghens to make sure nobody mugged him. When it comes to building a winning team you do better without those assorted meatheads,except of course back in the 80s when the game was not in great shape.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I agree there. In a physical game, Gretzky has no physical presence or intimidation factor. In a way, he was lucky that a Suter type hit didn't come earlier in his career.

When surrounded by scrubs, Gretzky was superior to Howe at making his teammates better though.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
Another interesting one for discussion would be Pele.

More goals than Gretzky in a sport where it's harder to score.
And dominance of a sport that's played by a lot more people - the ability to shine at the highest level of a sport (and on its biggest stage, the World Cup) that's played more or less globally.
 

shazariahl

Registered User
Apr 7, 2009
2,030
59
Gordie Howe never needed a team of Dave Lumleys and Semenkos and Callaghens to make sure nobody mugged him. When it comes to building a winning team you do better without those assorted meatheads,except of course back in the 80s when the game was not in great shape.

But Gretzky won as many cups as Howe's wings did during their dynasty, and in fewer years, and that was despite being in a 21 team league instead of a 6 team league. Howe's wings won 7 straight president's trophies, IIRC so it's not like they weren't the favorite in each of those seasons too. So it's hard to say that building a team around Howe would be better than doing so around Gretzky. Those assorted meatheads won 4 cups in 5 years.
 

struckbyaparkedcar

Guilty of Being Right
Mar 1, 2008
18,243
1,847
Upstate NY
St. Louis won a Hart during the DPE. Joe Sakic was one of its three best forwards at sub 6'/200. Gretzky is not held back by the clutch-n-grab whatsoever. He still destroyed it from a purely offensive perspective while well-past-his-prime. Bringing up the more conservative modern game like it was going to drag Wayne closer to earth is hand-wringing.
 

simon bedford

Registered User
Dec 13, 2014
123
0
Howe played a good decade longer than Gretzky ,and played hard and physical until his final season/return to the nhl, given the choice of the two in a modern game,i would take the player who can take care of himself, when Gretzky lost his speed he became very ordinary,something you could never say about Howe.
Place Howe in the defense non existant water down first 6 years of the 80s,and who knows what he would have done?
 

McGuillicuddy

Registered User
Sep 6, 2005
1,296
198
Howe played a good decade longer than Gretzky ,and played hard and physical until his final season/return to the nhl, given the choice of the two in a modern game,i would take the player who can take care of himself, when Gretzky lost his speed he became very ordinary,something you could never say about Howe.
Place Howe in the defense non existant water down first 6 years of the 80s,and who knows what he would have done?

That's a pile of crap to be honest, and this is from a guy who really likes Gordie Howe.

When Gretzky lost his speed (i.e. after the Suter incident), he became the best player not named Mario Lemieux for several more years. And still exceeded Mario on occasion (i.e. 1993 playoffs).
 

simon bedford

Registered User
Dec 13, 2014
123
0
Gretzky lost his speed in 1993? at the ripe old age of 31? now thats some grade a crap you are spinning there, he became ordinary when he lost his speed at age 36 and was done shortly thereafter, where as Howe who you seem to like but not know very well went on to play another 12 years or so while still managing to be quite good at all aspects of the game well into his mid 40s.
not sure where you got the idea that gretzky wasnt still quite quick in the early to mid 90s, he was still well above average at that point,but once he wasnt, then time was up pretty quickly for Gretzky.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Gretzky lost his speed in 1993? at the ripe old age of 31?
The "Suter incident" he refers to happened in September 1991, when Gretzky was 30.
now thats some grade a crap you are spinning there
Actually, he is exactly right. You are out of order.
he became ordinary when he lost his speed at age 36 and was done shortly thereafter
Would you care to explain how he suddenly "lost his speed" in 1997, between a 4th-place scoring finish and a third-place scoring finish?
were as Howe who you seem to like but not know very well went on to play another 12 years or so while still managing to be quite good at all aspects of the game well into his mid 40s.
Hmm. Howe's last All-Star level season at right-wing was 1969-70, when he was 41 (turned 42 around the end of the season). By the time he was 42 -- his last (pre-comeback) NHL season -- he was no longer at All-Star level, the Red Wings sucked, and he finished -2.

Howe in his mid-40s was in the WHA, long-past his NHL years. It's hard to say how he would have done in the NHL had he continued. Clearly he was more durable and stronger than Gretzky, but so were hundreds of other players much worse than Gretzky.
 

David Bruce Banner

Nude Cabdriver Ban
Mar 25, 2008
7,947
3,217
Streets Ahead
Howe was the right guy in the right place at the right time (Orr too, to some extent)... he got a good boost at the end of his career from NHL expansion, then enjoyed nearly a decade of padding his legacy in a sub-NHL tier league during a era when the demand for good hockey players far outstripped the supply.

Gretzky took advantage of a somewhat watered down early 80's NHL, but the influx of Euros really helped out the LQ factor.

I'd take Gretzky over Howe in the modern game too... but don't get me wrong, I'd be very happy with either and have no doubt that they both would still dominate.
 

Minar

Registered User
Aug 27, 2018
328
288
Howe played a good decade longer than Gretzky ,and played hard and physical until his final season/return to the nhl, given the choice of the two in a modern game,i would take the player who can take care of himself, when Gretzky lost his speed he became very ordinary,something you could never say about Howe.
Place Howe in the defense non existant water down first 6 years of the 80s,and who knows what he would have done?

Gretzky was never ordinary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scott clam

Minar

Registered User
Aug 27, 2018
328
288
Howe was the right guy in the right place at the right time (Orr too, to some extent)... he got a good boost at the end of his career from NHL expansion, then enjoyed nearly a decade of padding his legacy in a sub-NHL tier league during a era when the demand for good hockey players far outstripped the supply.

Gretzky took advantage of a somewhat watered down early 80's NHL, but the influx of Euros really helped out the LQ factor.

I'd take Gretzky over Howe in the modern game too... but don't get me wrong, I'd be very happy with either and have no doubt that they both would still dominate.

Im not going to argue who was better Howe or Gretzky. But the arguments on the thread against Gretzky aren't good ones. Your making it sound like Gretzky was on a Rick Vaive level or something where he couldn't hack it past the early 80s. He had his highest scoring year in 1985. He won the art ross 4 times after 1985! How many players have even won the art ross trophy 4 times? He won hart twice after 1985. He had a conn smythe.

Your making it seem like when the influx of European players came in Gretzky couldn't hack it. How did Bure (who was a young man) do against Gretzky (who was already past his prime) in the 1993 playoffs when Gretzky had 40 pts? How did Federov do against an old Gretzky in the 1994 scoring race. Cmon you gotta at least say Gretzky was holding his own against these guys from Europe who were 10 years younger than him. Gretzky could handle the late 80s and 90s nhl more than fine.

Gretzky was not some phenom relegated to the early 80s. And certainly the fact that he played with some players who were known to get rough if somebody gave him a cheapshot isn't any reason to cut down his great play. Its hockey not a barroom antics. Besides ive seen plenty of games on youtube where he got hit hard and nobody came to punish the offender.

Gretzky was never ordinary. Even in his last season teams had to put there top line out against him. He was always something to worry about. Have you seen the game from his last season in 1999 where the rangers play Detroit? Its on youtube right now. Most of the game is uneventful, but there is one shift where 99 dismantles the whole Detroit team singlehandedly. Passes are flying off his stick to open teammates from all over the place. Detriot was the best team of the time! At one point stickhandles right past Lindstrom, one of the best defenders of all time, and a European! In 1999 when Gretzky was way past his prime, only a shadow of himself he was still not ordinary!
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,949
now that 5 years has passed and lebron is still winning finals MVPs, are we ready to wonder whether he might be basketball's gordie howe?

even more than kareem, lebron just physically seems like an indestructible howeian freak of nature..
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,042
12,664
now that 5 years has passed and lebron is still winning finals MVPs, are we ready to wonder whether he might be basketball's gordie howe?

even more than kareem, lebron just physically seems like an indestructible howeian freak of nature..

It's certainly possible. Abdul Jabbar's career mirrors Howe's more closely, but the physical aspect does seem to favour LeBron. By the mid to late 80s Abdul Jabbar was very much a finesse centre.

As for the question in the thread, probably Gretzky but Chamberlain was a more well rounded player. Chamberlain would have been a massively valuable asset even if he scored 25% of the points he did each season.
 

A Higher League

Registered User
Nov 4, 2018
4
4
Gretzky is the best offensive player ever. Orr's adjusted numbers for peak we're even better than Mario's, as shown by the last top 100 project, so Orr was second all-time in offense.
Orr is also one of the best defensive players all-time while Gretzky is far, far away from the top. Orr's counterparts in basketball are Jordan and Wilt who were also elite on both ends.
That's why legends like Gordie, Bobby H and BobbyC, Guy, Larry, and Serge among many others all said Orr is the man without hesitation. Orr's stature among legends is even better than Jordan's as several legends don't have him as the man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dennis Bonvie

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
Gretzky is the best offensive player ever. Orr's adjusted numbers for peak we're even better than Mario's, as shown by the last top 100 project, so Orr was second all-time in offense.
Orr is also one of the best defensive players all-time while Gretzky is far, far away from the top. Orr's counterparts in basketball are Jordan and Wilt who were also elite on both ends.
That's why legends like Gordie, Bobby H and BobbyC, Guy, Larry, and Serge among many others all said Orr is the man without hesitation. Orr's stature among legends is even better than Jordan's as several legends don't have him as the man.
It's mostly the older players that don't have MJ as "the man" though. Most notably Isiah doesn't, but you know with him it's personal.
 

Robert Gordon Orr

Registered User
Dec 3, 2009
978
2,039
Steffi Graf is probably #1.

Most dominate in Cricket and Jai Alai

Sir Donald Bradman

Jose Antonio Illoro (Bolivar)


If we are talking about the most dominant athletes of all time, then many are talking about Phelps, Jordan, Gretzky or Chamberlain, but there were more dominant athletes out there. Bradman was really dominant in Cricket for sure. I have to read up on the Jai Alai guy, but being dominant in such a fast sport is impressive.

Speaking of dominance.

Aleksandr Karelin (Russian Wrestler) - He had a wrestling record of 887 wins and two losses. Both losses were by a point. Opponents failed to take a point from him in six years. I think he was undefeated for a 13 year stretch at one time. That is quite a remarkable feat. He was a beast !

Masahiko Kimura (Japanese Judoka) - Awesome judoka who only lost four fights in his entire career. All losses came in 1935, and he avenged all of them later in his career. Most famous for beating the "godfather of BJJ" Hélio Gracie in Brazil. Pound-for-pound he had no peers. Today, the "Kimura" reverse arm lock is named after him.

Reinhold Messner (Italian Mountaineer) - His will power and physical endurance is legendary. He was the first climber to ascend all fourteen 8,000 metres (26,000 ft) peaks. On top of that he did them all without supplemental oxygen, which is quite remarkable. An absolute tour de force in the days when the equipment wasn't what it is today. Made many first ascents. And he survived !

Jahangir Khan (Pakistani squash player) - Went unbeaten for 555 straight games between 1981 and 1986. Khan had superb conditioning and was quick as a weasel. He absolutely dominated the sport, and to beat him twice in a row was almost impossible. Khan was already the amateur World Champion at the age of 15.

Edwin Moses (American track & field athlete) - The guy won 122 consecutive races, including 107 finals. He did not lose a 400 m hurdles race in nine years, nine months and nine days. Technically flawless and had perfect timing.

Mike Tyson was a dominant force in the early years, and is a candidate when looking at peak value. But both Tyson and for example Rocky Marciano both only fought a few really good fighters. Usain Bolt is also someone who was quite dominant for years, beating the best of the rest all the time.

I am sure that I forgot about someone, but the five above are the ones that came to my mind when speaking of dominance in a sport.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Jahangir Khan (Pakistani squash player) - Went unbeaten for 555 straight games between 1981 and 1986. Khan had superb conditioning and was quick as a weasel. He absolutely dominated the sport, and to beat him twice in a row was almost impossible.
In other words, if you were lucky enough to beat him once, you would then face... the wrath of Khan?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dennis Bonvie

David Bruce Banner

Nude Cabdriver Ban
Mar 25, 2008
7,947
3,217
Streets Ahead
Im not going to argue who was better Howe or Gretzky. But the arguments on the thread against Gretzky aren't good ones. Your making it sound like Gretzky was on a Rick Vaive level or something where he couldn't hack it past the early 80s. He had his highest scoring year in 1985. He won the art ross 4 times after 1985! How many players have even won the art ross trophy 4 times? He won hart twice after 1985. He had a conn smythe.

Your making it seem like when the influx of European players came in Gretzky couldn't hack it. How did Bure (who was a young man) do against Gretzky (who was already past his prime) in the 1993 playoffs when Gretzky had 40 pts? How did Federov do against an old Gretzky in the 1994 scoring race. Cmon you gotta at least say Gretzky was holding his own against these guys from Europe who were 10 years younger than him. Gretzky could handle the late 80s and 90s nhl more than fine.

Gretzky was not some phenom relegated to the early 80s. And certainly the fact that he played with some players who were known to get rough if somebody gave him a cheapshot isn't any reason to cut down his great play. Its hockey not a barroom antics. Besides ive seen plenty of games on youtube where he got hit hard and nobody came to punish the offender.

Gretzky was never ordinary. Even in his last season teams had to put there top line out against him. He was always something to worry about. Have you seen the game from his last season in 1999 where the rangers play Detroit? Its on youtube right now. Most of the game is uneventful, but there is one shift where 99 dismantles the whole Detroit team singlehandedly. Passes are flying off his stick to open teammates from all over the place. Detriot was the best team of the time! At one point stickhandles right past Lindstrom, one of the best defenders of all time, and a European! In 1999 when Gretzky was way past his prime, only a shadow of himself he was still not ordinary!

Actually I was implying quite the opposite for the most part. There is no arguing though that LQ was not at it's best immediately following the merger with the WHA... but even then I would say that it was better than it had been in the '70's. The number of professional teams was down and the number good European players was up. I'd venture to say that by the mid-80's, LQ was probably pretty similar to our current LQ... and that was the era that Gretzky dominated in... and that made his impressive play even more impressive. IMHO, of 4 players generally considered to be the greatest of all time, probably only Lemieux peaked on a similarly difficult playing field as Gretzky.
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
Gretzky is the best offensive player ever. Orr's adjusted numbers for peak we're even better than Mario's, as shown by the last top 100 project, so Orr was second all-time in offense.
Orr is also one of the best defensive players all-time while Gretzky is far, far away from the top. Orr's counterparts in basketball are Jordan and Wilt who were also elite on both ends.
That's why legends like Gordie, Bobby H and BobbyC, Guy, Larry, and Serge among many others all said Orr is the man without hesitation. Orr's stature among legends is even better than Jordan's as several legends don't have him as the man.
Excuse me? Orr better than Lemieux offensively? What a horrible take
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Actually I was implying quite the opposite for the most part. There is no arguing though that LQ was not at it's best immediately following the merger with the WHA... but even then I would say that it was better than it had been in the '70's. The number of professional teams was down and the number good European players was up. I'd venture to say that by the mid-80's, LQ was probably pretty similar to our current LQ... and that was the era that Gretzky dominated in... and that made his impressive play even more impressive. IMHO, of 4 players generally considered to be the greatest of all time, probably only Lemieux peaked on a similarly difficult playing field as Gretzky.

Perhaps if you are speaking strictly of offensive ability. Very entertaining era.

Quality of overall play like night and day.
 

David Bruce Banner

Nude Cabdriver Ban
Mar 25, 2008
7,947
3,217
Streets Ahead
Perhaps if you are speaking strictly of offensive ability. Very entertaining era.

Quality of overall play like night and day.

I’m talking about the general pool of talent available to the NHL divided by the number of NHL (and in our case, to some extent KHL teams)... not about training, equipment or strategy developments which will always make the LQ “better” if judged in a vacuum.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->