This one gave me a laugh

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by kmad, Dec 24, 2010.

  1. kmad

    kmad riot survivor

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    34,119
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Vancouver
  2. LeBlondeDemon10

    LeBlondeDemon10 BlindLemon Haystacks

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,262
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah, me too. I definitely disagree with the statement about today's goalies being more athletic. They are on average larger men and have equipment that blocks most of the net. Most of the time, they just have to be in position. Thomas may be the most athletic goalie of today; and perhaps the only one who plays with a style similar to years past. That's not to say goalies from the past were better or worse. But when you can cover 80 % of the net by just standing there, you have quite an advantage.

    He makes some interesting points about Crosby's scoring vs the league and his team. But he still hasn't scored 200 points in a season yet. Until that happens, I will think of Crosby as simply another great player. And I think the comparisons are unfair to both of them. They each play a different style of game.

    And I doubt any scout would question Orr's size in any era. He was just too damn good. Besides, smaller, quicker players are beginning to find more places in the league since the lockout.
     
  3. :cry:
     
  4. BraveCanadian

    BraveCanadian Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Ok, lets say 160 points then.

    Result is still the same.
     
  5. Reds4Life

    Reds4Life Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Location:
    the Czech republic
    What so funny about the article? Everything he says is true.
     
  6. BraveCanadian

    BraveCanadian Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Actually it's kind of nonsense.

    "Crosby is a bigger portion of his teams offense"

    then he says its surprising cause Gretzky played with better teammates.

    Well.. if Gretzky's teammates were better then maybe they would score more too and that might have an effect on the proportion of scoring that Gretzky was involved in on the team?

    So that's a stupid line of logic that is kind of his premise for his argument.

    Not to mention the fact that Crosby hasn't even completed a full season at the pace he is currently maintaining yet.

    It is just like all the threads about "Can Stamkos hit 70 goals this year?" that started on the boards here because he was hot for 20 games.

    If Crosby hits 150+ points get back to me, otherwise this is just wishful thinking.
     
  7. TheDevilMadeMe

    TheDevilMadeMe Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    47,507
    Likes Received:
    1,782
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Awards:
    Haha, I laughed at that too.
     
  8. I think that's impossible today. If he gets more than 130 this year, which I'm betting he doesn't, I'll actually be really surprised. That would call for him maintaining his current pace for the rest of the season which is just not likely at all. If he managed that though, combined with his defensive game and linemates I would have to consider him on a similar level to Gretzky and Lemieux. Then of course if he could maintain that for multiple seasons, I could possibly consider him as good or better.

    I'll say this now though. Crosby's point totals by the end of the year will be closer to 120 then to 130. 125 MAX in his current situation IMO. So if 160 is what you're looking for, or 170-180 from others, then yeah Gretzky wins by far and always will, but that's where the problem lies...
     
  9. Derick*

    Derick* Guest

    Same.

    Era is a factor, but people really don't appreciate the gap between Gretzky and the rest. It's like all they remember is Gretzky's 200 - 215 totals so they assume the other stars of the league were scoring ~180. They weren't. They were scoring ~120.

    Crosby would have to score 165 - 180 points today to dominate the competition the way Gretzky did.
     
  10. Lots of guys were scoring between 130-150 on any given year, and I've never heard anyone mention or assume everyone was scoring 180 in the 80's in my life. Also multiple valid reasons have been shown on this board why it's harder to stand out statistically than it used to be.

    Crosby has as many points as a team has goals right now, plays with third liners, and is close to elite defensively. But all common sense points to Crosby not being anywhere close to as good as Gretzky. Think about it.
     
  11. Derick*

    Derick* Guest

    In the 14 seasons from 1980 through to 1993, 4 times did a player who wasn't Gretzky, Lemiux, or one of Gretzky's linemates score more than 140 points. So you can hardly say "lots of guys were scoring between 130-150 on any given year."

    They're assuming that implicitly when they say that things like that scoring 120 - 130 points today is equivalent to scoring 200 points back then.
     
  12. Derick*

    Derick* Guest

    And I've never heard any argument that it's harder to stand out today than when people assume that because no one is the way they were back then. Which of course proves nothing.

    Obviously it's hard to score but I don't see how the difficulty to score would have increased more for the highest scoring couple of players than for the the players I use as a measuring stick.
     
  13. Up the Irons

    Up the Irons Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,449
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Location:
    Canada
    Forget stats. Gretz won 9 Hart trophies. When Crosby gets 5 or 6, I'll begin to entertain the notion that he is on Gretzky's level. Right now he has a grand total of one, and will have two by July of 2011. Along ways to go, kiddies.
     
  14. TheDevilMadeMe

    TheDevilMadeMe Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    47,507
    Likes Received:
    1,782
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Awards:
    The only two valid reasons I've heard for why it's harder to stand out today are:

    1) Larger talent pool, particularly after the Euros came over
    2) The game is more defensive-minded / systems oriented so individual talent can't stand out so much.

    Well, guess what? #1 applied to the 1990s too. I have yet to see any reason that the talent pool has gotten larger since the mid 90s. If anything, it has gotten slightly smaller with the KHL "stealing" some players and the salary cap affecting personnel decisions.

    And #2 applied to the dead puck era moreso than today. With no clutch and grab, talented guys are definitely able to stand out at least a little bit more.

    And guess what? Crosby still doesn't stand out as much as Mario Lemieux did.
     
  15. BraveCanadian

    BraveCanadian Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    11,864
    Likes Received:
    129
    Trophy Points:
    111
    No, its impossible for today's players. And that is because none of them are as offensively talented as a Gretzky or Lemieux.

    Maybe this is because of how structured hockey is even at very early ages now - killing creativity and fun. Maybe it is because there are very few free outdoor public rinks left in Canadian (or elsewhere I imagine) towns and cities. Maybe its just fluke chance because of the rarity of talent like those two in any field.

    Who knows?

    The fact is there is no way to spin the numbers or fake out our eyes and suggest that Crosby is better than either of those two offensively.


    I thought knocking 55 points off his record was pretty generous.

    Maybe the problem actually is your assumption that the current generation of players is always the best?

    Everything seems to point to that being the problem in this case.
     
  16. Rhiessan71

    Rhiessan71 Just a Fool

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    11,621
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Location:
    Guelph, Ont
    Home Page:
    Agreed, the chances of us all agreeing on a number is pretty unlikely but keeping it conservative seems to lessen the "noise" ;)

    Definitely.
    This seems to be one of the only recurring points in every argument that makes sense.....Occam's razor.
     
  17. Hardyvan123

    Hardyvan123 [email protected]

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    17,552
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Ya that's the response I had it wasn't like he just shot off a random opinion, he based it on some stats and even opened up that stats can be use any way one wants as well, it's just a conversation piece.

    I always have a laugh when a guy says that Crosby needs to get 200 points in a season to be compared to Gretzky, kinda shows that they don't understand how the game changes over time.

    While I can quibble if it needs to be 160 it sure doesn't need to be 200 points by any stretch.
     
  18. Hardyvan123

    Hardyvan123 [email protected]

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    17,552
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    The #1 part wasn't into full swing until the 90's and the influx of the US college system becoming a big feeder program is still growing with players coming from new markets in recent years.

    Also Canada after a particularly bad Jr defeat, going off of memory here but I believe it was 88, started to put a lot more development into elite programs something that other countries have followed.

    The hardest thing about the 2 variables brought up here, change in the talent pool and better defensive systems is that there is no objective way to indicate how much of an impact they have, we can take logical guesses at it.

    One thing though is that I think a lot of people can't appreciate that even subtle differences, like the size and type and style of goal tending combined with most every player blocking shots and the talent pool increasing taken together can have a large impact on scoring than is given credit for.

    One final note on Lemieux, while Crosby might not be the best defensive forward in the league he sure plays a much more rounded game than either Lemieux or Gretzky ever played or were asked to play.

    We have no idea how much their scoring would have been impacted if they had been demanded by their coaches during their playing days to be more defensively responsible but it would have had some impact.

    It would also be interesting to see how many empty net points Gretzky, and the league had back in the 80's compared to today as the game plan for teams with a one goal lead is much different today than it was back then.

    Before guys go all berserk, I acknowledge that Wayne is the best scoring player of all time but it is something to be considered when we evaluate players from different seasons and eras IMO.
     
  19. Hardyvan123

    Hardyvan123 [email protected]

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    17,552
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    http://www.nhlsnipers.com/wayne-gretzky-talking-about-sidney-crosby/

    Some interesting comments on the Kid by Wayne.

    While there is some truth in the above statement about the structure of the game limiting imagination in the style of play, cycling comes to mind, the talent of top guys like Malkin and Crosby and AO aren't that much different than Wane and Mario IMO.

    The biggest difference is how we view these guys, both Wayne and Mario played in a league that had less talent overall and weaker players on the bottom end than the league has today.

    There is no doubt that both Gretzky and Mario were the best players in the NHL during their playing days but it is also easier to dominate and dominate more in a weaker league.

    it is entirely possible that Wayne and Mario are 1,2 all time in terms of offensive talent but it is also possible that the gap between them and Guys like Crosby and Malkin (at least talent wise when he wants to play) is closer than some give them credit for because of the difference in the leagues that the players played in at the time they played.
     
  20. kmad

    kmad riot survivor

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    34,119
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    171
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Of course it's true. It's just really obvious, and he's approaching the idea as though it's some groundbreaking new concept that will rock the hockey world.
     
  21. Rhiessan71

    Rhiessan71 Just a Fool

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    11,621
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Location:
    Guelph, Ont
    Home Page:

    Once again, for the what seems like the millionth time, Mario's comeback exactly 10 years ago today more than shows he was still a whole level above the rest of the league even at 36 and as broken as he was compared to his youth.

    Your theory that it's harder to dominate today than it was 20-30 years ago holds water and no one is really saying different.
    It also holds water that Wayne and Mario themselves wouldn't be as dominant.
    There is actual evidence to support such conclusions.

    Where imo you go wrong however, is when you refuse to believe that Wayne and Mario would still dominant the league to a far greater degree than anyone currently playing.
    This part of your argument is actually made in the face of the evidence.

    Just because it's harder to dominant, doesn't mean they would be "capped" at the level or even close to the level of Sid and OV.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2010
  22. Hardyvan123

    Hardyvan123 [email protected]

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    17,552
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Mario's 01 season was a great performance but it was also only 43 games and not a whole season either.

    While no one knows for sure how Wayne and Mario would do in today's league they would not lead their next highest scorers by 50 plus points either is pretty certain unless they were able to find a team that played all out offense and didn't care about how many goals they gave up, (which is how Edmonton played in the early 80's) and that such a style would even work today with the defensive systems and the salary cap considerations.

    Which is to say that they most likely would not be able to dominate the same way they did statistically during their playing days.

    Goal scoring is down overall, defensive play and systems are much tighter, pretty sure empty net points are harder to come by (as Gretzky had quite a few but can't recall how Mario did in this area of the game).

    Easy shifts and games are much harder to come by than in the 80's and even to a lesser extent than the 90's.

    The different variables to consider are pretty much endless and are all speculative as to how much of an effect they would have.

    My best guess is that healthy and fully motivated Mario would do slightly better than Wayne in today's game and in the perfect situation would be doing better than Sid is this season, in terms of stats.
     
  23. TheDevilMadeMe

    TheDevilMadeMe Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    47,507
    Likes Received:
    1,782
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Awards:
    Right. I thought the entire article was very "firm grasp of the obvious" with the hilarious logical fallacy Brave Canadian pointed out above thrown in for good measure.
     
  24. Rhiessan71

    Rhiessan71 Just a Fool

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    11,621
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Location:
    Guelph, Ont
    Home Page:
    Far, far too many unfounded and unprovable assumptions on your part and many of them simply don't fit with what we knew of Gretzky and Lemieux.

    At the heart of it, you are pretty much saying there is no possible way they could of maintained their almost inhuman production while adapting to the changes in the game and once again the actual evidence supports the extreme opposite.
     
  25. pappyline

    pappyline Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    Mass/formerly Ont
    "Or did Richard and Bobby Hull have it easier than Crosby and Steven Stamkos, who today must find a way to slip the puck through a gaggle of bodies, past netminders perhaps more athletic as anyone on an NHL roster? "

    Just to pick one bad statement from the article. Richard & Hull certainly didn't have it easy. They had to slip the puck through a gaggle (whatever that means) of bodies whilst often having a defender on their back or hacking & chopping at them while trying to get their shot away. Also the most athletic goalies i have seen were Hall & Hasek
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"