Wayne Gretzky overrated

[District 5]

Yeah... 2957 points, 1963 Assists (more than any other player has POINTS) says he is definitely NOT overrated.

This stat floors me... in 85-86 he wins the scoring title again with his ASSISTS alone (163). That's equivalent to winning the MLB batting title hitting .700

The 80's were higher scoring yes, but Gretzky was on another level.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Maybe his numbers were a perfect storm, maybe this, maybe that, but there's no maybe that he was the greatest offensive genius and a great leader.So where do you rank such a guy, THE offensive genius in history and a great leader with multiple cups? Well you rank him somewhere in the Top-5, and most likely Top-3.

So no, not overrated.

I think Gretzky has to be ranked in the top two.

Someone can argue that Orr had a higher peak. I think that's probably a true statement (but not by much). So if one were to rank Orr first, they'd have to ignore Gretzky's massive advantage in prime, consistency and longevity. That's fine - but then you couldn't rank Howe ahead of Gretzky too. In order to be consistent, you'd have to rank Gretzky second overall because he had a higher peak than Howe (having just taken the position that even a big edge in prime, consistency and longevity don't matter).

Similarly, one can argue that Howe should be first on the basis of his enormous prime, consistency and longevity, even if Gretzky had a higher peak. That's fine too - but then you couldn't rank Orr ahead of Gretzky, because you've just taken the position that prime etc. is most significant.

Lemieux was no better than Gretzky at his absolute best, and Gretzky had a longer/better prime, a longer/better career, and was better in the playoffs and international tournaments. There's no serious argument that he should be ranked higher all-time.

In summary - either Orr or Howe can be ranked ahead of Gretzky, but I don't see how both of them can be without the list being inconsistent.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think Gretzky has to be ranked in the top two.

Someone can argue that Orr had a higher peak. I think that's probably a true statement (but not by much). So if one were to rank Orr first, they'd have to ignore Gretzky's massive advantage in prime, consistency and longevity. That's fine - but then you couldn't rank Howe ahead of Gretzky too. In order to be consistent, you'd have to rank Gretzky second overall because he had a higher peak than Howe (having just taken the position that even a big edge in prime, consistency and longevity don't matter).

Similarly, one can argue that Howe should be first on the basis of his enormous prime, consistency and longevity, even if Gretzky had a higher peak. That's fine too - but then you couldn't rank Orr ahead of Gretzky, because you've just taken the position that prime etc. is most significant.

Lemieux was no better than Gretzky at his absolute best, and Gretzky had a longer/better prime, a longer/better career, and was better in the playoffs and international tournaments. There's no serious argument that he should be ranked higher all-time.

In summary - either Orr or Howe can be ranked ahead of Gretzky, but I don't see how both of them can be without the list being inconsistent.

I agree.I myself usually rank him #1.

 

[blogofmike]

One of my favourite things about the new NHL 100 stat updates is the even strength points:
NHL.com - Stats

Wayne Gretzky is listed as having 5 ES assists in 1985-86. This is likely because they allocated 2 digits to that column, so it's incorrectly input as 05 instead of 105, and then interpreted as 5.

Given that the highest non-Gretzky ES point total is 104, no one conceived of the possibility someone could get 105 ES assists.

 

[TomatoJos]

Eh... What?

"Dominated" is exactly the right word.

First of all -- the Soviets: On the rare occasions when Gretzky played against them in best-on-bests (those in his prime years between 1981 and 1991), here's how he did:

9GP: 3G + 14A = 17PTS (weirdly, he didn't score against them in one game in '91, but anyway...)

So, when the Soviet Union team was at its best (1980s), Gretzky only got 16 points in 8 games against them, in best-on-best tournaments (at Canada Cup). I haven't got the Soviet players' stats to hand vs. Canada, but it would be interesting to compare...


Then, to your point about "Mickey Mouse clubs": In Gretzky's salad-days in Edmonton, here's how he did in regular season against the top teams in the NHL (top between 1979-80 and 1987-88):
vs. Montreal
28GP: 17G + 35A = 52PTS

vs. Philadelphia
27GP: 27G + 32A = 59PTS

vs. Boston
27GP: 12G + 28A = 40PTS

vs. Calgary
62GP: 47G + 92A = 133PTS

vs. Buffalo
29GP: 15G + 35A = 50PTS


So, let's see... Against the NHL's top 5 teams during those nine years (excl. Edmonton, obviously), Gretzky put up a grand total of: 173GP: 118G + 222A = 340PTS
If you project this pace to an 80-game season, it's: 55G + 103A = 158PTS -- which is more than any other player in history had ever scored in a season -- and this is an average for 9 years. So, domination again. However, in reality he probably would have put up better numbers than that if he'd been playing these teams regularly. As the playoffs show, when he played such teams (Philly, Boston) more often, he did better...

Now, what about playoffs? How did Gretzky, with Edmonton, do in the third and fourth rounds only of the playoffs, when those weaker and more offensive teams like Winnipeg and L.A. were already dispensed with? Let's see:
vs. third and fourth round in playoffs:
50GP: 30G + 71A = 101PTS
If you project this pace to an 80-game season, it's: 48G + 114A = 162 PTS -- which, again, is more than anybody before him (or any player in history except Mario twice) had scored, ever. And that's in the championship rounds of the playoffs, when most players' scoring stats go down by as much as 50%.

So, in conclusion, Gretzky dominated the Soviets, dominated the best NHL teams, and dominated against the toughest playoff competition. Better luck next time!

A lot of assists doesn't sound like a domination to me.. He was running the most productive lines on team Canada. Hence, the great stats.

Domination is when you steamroll the opposite team. When you destroy them. When you annihilate their defence. One could do it against West Germany but not against the arch rivals. How could he dominate them when his teams have lost almost half of the games against the Soviets?

 

[Namba 17]

Thanks.

Have you got Gretzky's stats versus the Soviets and Red Army club?

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/na-players-stats-vs-soviet-players.2428805/

 

[Namba 17]

He had 3 points in two games in 1981. Can't find the stats for the two games in 1984.

0G + 3A = 3 P

 

[daver]

A lot of assists doesn't sound like a domination to me.. He was running the most productive lines on team Canada. Hence, the great stats.

Domination is when you steamroll the opposite team. When you destroy them. When you annihilate their defence. One could do it against West Germany but not against the arch rivals. How could he dominate them when his teams have lost almost half of the games against the Soviets?

So individual performances are solely rated by a team's performance?

Who is your #1 player all-time then? Jean Belliveau?

 

[bobholly39]

I think Gretzky has to be ranked in the top two.

Someone can argue that Orr had a higher peak. I think that's probably a true statement (but not by much). So if one were to rank Orr first, they'd have to ignore Gretzky's massive advantage in prime, consistency and longevity. That's fine - but then you couldn't rank Howe ahead of Gretzky too. In order to be consistent, you'd have to rank Gretzky second overall because he had a higher peak than Howe (having just taken the position that even a big edge in prime, consistency and longevity don't matter).

Similarly, one can argue that Howe should be first on the basis of his enormous prime, consistency and longevity, even if Gretzky had a higher peak. That's fine too - but then you couldn't rank Orr ahead of Gretzky, because you've just taken the position that prime etc. is most significant.

Lemieux was no better than Gretzky at his absolute best, and Gretzky had a longer/better prime, a longer/better career, and was better in the playoffs and international tournaments. There's no serious argument that he should be ranked higher all-time.

In summary - either Orr or Howe can be ranked ahead of Gretzky, but I don't see how both of them can be without the list being inconsistent.

I think you have to be very generous and very much the type of person who wants to go outside the norm to rank anyone ahead of Gretzky. I simply don't see an argument for him even at #2.

Best career? Gretzky
Best Prime? Gretzky
Best Peak? Gretzky (maybe you can make an argument for Orr - but you can just as easily, if not moreso, make it for Gretzky I think)
Best Playoffs? Gretzky
Best international tournaments? Gretzky


he has no weaknesses. He didn't age as well as others - maybe - but that's still better than Orr (who retired) and Lemieux (who missed a ton of games). Did he age better than Howe? That's a bit more difficult to say of course - obviously Howe has more "longevity" in the absolute sense, but Gretzky was still near the top of scoring races when he retired. So he didn't fall off all that much. He fell off from his 200+ point paces, but he was still among league leaders at the end.

So yeah if you're ranking an overall all time list I still don't see an argument for anyone but Gretzky.

You can certainly make "what if" arguments. If Orr played through to 35-40 - could he match/top Gretzky? Maybe
If Lemieux had no health issues - could he match/top Gretzky? Maybe - I do think he would have aged better for example.

I don't see a case for an all-time list without Gretzky at #1 though. If we look at only one aspect (peak) you can always argue one person or another maybe - but overall it's Gretzky.

 

[TomatoJos]

So individual performances are solely rated by a team's performance?

Who is your #1 player all-time then? Jean Belliveau?

Solely rated? Who said that?

No 1 is Bobby Orr

 

[blogofmike]

Solely rated? Who said that?

No 1 is Bobby Orr

I'd say Gretzky was better against the Soviets in Canada Cup play than Orr was against the Canadiens in playoff games.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Take Gretzky and Lemieux away and overall scoring would still be more or less the same. Goals per game wouldn'drop. It's much easier to get 200 Points in a leauge that has 8 Goals per game, than getting them in leauge that has 5 Goals per game.

My point was the absurd point totals they were putting up literally make 80s hockey look like a beer league. It's the image of the 80s they left behind.

I mean like I said before, Yzerman would have the highest single season point total at 155....that's not that big of a difference from let's say Kane's 106 point season compared to 215 points.

 

[daver]

Solely rated? Who said that?

No 1 is Bobby Orr

You just said that Wayne wasn't dominant against the Soviets because Team Canada didn't dominate the Soviets.

 

[MXD]

He's overrated when described as head, shoulders, torso and abdomen above Bobby Orr, Gordie and (to a lesser extent) Mario Lemieux.

 

[TomatoJos]

You just said that Wayne wasn't dominant against the Soviets because Team Canada didn't dominate the Soviets.

Read my post again. He was very productive but he didn't steamroll them.

I wonder what was his plus - minus against the Soviets.

 

[TomatoJos]

He's overrated when described as head, shoulders, torso and abdomen above Bobby Orr, Gordie and (to a lesser extent) Mario Lemieux.

Good point.
Yes, some fans describe him like some kind of a semi-mythological supernatural being who could dominate any team at will. Just like Crosby is being described by some of his fans...

 

[authentic]

One of my favourite things about the new NHL 100 stat updates is the even strength points:
NHL.com - Stats

Wayne Gretzky is listed as having 5 ES assists in 1985-86. This is likely because they allocated 2 digits to that column, so it's incorrectly input as 05 instead of 105, and then interpreted as 5.

Given that the highest non-Gretzky ES point total is 104, no one conceived of the possibility someone could get 105 ES assists.

Is that still true to this day?

 

[blogofmike]

Is that still true to this day?

Yes the site still says 5. Check the link.

And yes 104 is the highest non Gretzky ESP season. No one else caught Lafleur, who is now tied for 7th with 80-81 Gretzky with 104.

For his 12 pre-injury NHL years Gretzky hit 100 ES points in 10 of the 12. He was hurt the other two but still cleared 90 and paced for 100+. Gretzky was 1st in ES points 11 years. In the 12th he was 3rd, 1 back of Yzerman's career high and 2 back of Lemieux's career high.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Ridiculous. Gretzky right now is pretty much like the Beatles. He's become underrated if anything.

Basically you had to watch the NHL pre Gretzky and then see somebody like him arrive on the scene to get the full appreciation of things. It was really almost impossible.

He was not a physical specimen at first glance by any means, but he was gifted with incredible abilities to recovery and get right back on the ice while others are still gassed from a grueling shift (this was tested I believe at Oilers camp in the 80's). His vision and awareness have never been even approached. Anticipation, thinking multiple steps ahead, controlling the game. Because the brute strength was never there and he was something of a thin, wiry guy, he had to devise other ways to evade, elude, deceive others on the ice. His formative years were played against much larger competition...if he didn't figure out how to avoid and outwit them he'd be crushed.

Then came the precision. It's one thing to think the game like a genius but Gretzky also had unbelievable hand eye coordination and an unprecedented ability to put the puck exactly where he wanted to whenever he wanted to. Any corner, any teammates stick from everywhere. His shot was never amongst the hardest in the league, but nobody put it exactly where he wanted it more often than Wayne.

Then the mental toughness. He was a child prodigy...people hated him. He was booed mercilessly when he was 10 years old. By the time he got to the WHA and NHL, he was a lot more hardened and ready for this than others thought.

Gretzky WAS the perfect storm. Nobody has put together such a combination of work ethic, skill, precision, dedication, intellect, mental toughness, and passion...plus a few genetic gifts. He's Babe Ruth level really. He's above Jordan, above Tom Brady and Peyton Manning.

Just wondering if you saw Orr break into the NHL and had seen the league before him.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You probably didn't need to go to this much trouble. My point was, there were defense-first teams in the 80s, and Gretzky still dominated them. There were offense-first teams, and Gretzky dominated them. There were in-between teams, and Gretzky dominated them. There were international tournaments of Best-on-Best and Gretzky dominated in them.

Random example of what I was talking about: In 1980-81, the Montreal Canadiens allowed 232 goals against. For a comparison, last season (2016-17) there were about 7 or 8 teams in the Eastern Conference that allowed more goals-against than that, and about 5 in the Western conference. That is, one-third to one-half of all NHL teams last season allowed the same or more goals-against than Montreal in 1981.

In 1981, as we know, Gretzky met Montreal in the playoffs, and he lit them up for 11 points in three games, and wasn't on the ice for a single Montreal goal against.

As I said, get back to me when someone wins 8 straight League MVPs, and then we'll talk about over-rated....

"In 1981, as we know, Gretzky met Montreal in the playoffs, and he lit them up for 11 points in three games, and wasn't on the ice for a single Montreal goal against."

That's wild!

Of note also: Savard -8 and Robinson -9 in those 3 games.

But Gretzky was -1 in the next round against the Islanders.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think you have to be very generous and very much the type of person who wants to go outside the norm to rank anyone ahead of Gretzky. I simply don't see an argument for him even at #2.

Best career? Gretzky
Best Prime? Gretzky
Best Peak? Gretzky (maybe you can make an argument for Orr - but you can just as easily, if not moreso, make it for Gretzky I think)
Best Playoffs? Gretzky
Best international tournaments? Gretzky


he has no weaknesses. He didn't age as well as others - maybe - but that's still better than Orr (who retired) and Lemieux (who missed a ton of games). Did he age better than Howe? That's a bit more difficult to say of course - obviously Howe has more "longevity" in the absolute sense, but Gretzky was still near the top of scoring races when he retired. So he didn't fall off all that much. He fell off from his 200+ point paces, but he was still among league leaders at the end.

So yeah if you're ranking an overall all time list I still don't see an argument for anyone but Gretzky.

You can certainly make "what if" arguments. If Orr played through to 35-40 - could he match/top Gretzky? Maybe
If Lemieux had no health issues - could he match/top Gretzky? Maybe - I do think he would have aged better for example.

I don't see a case for an all-time list without Gretzky at #1 though. If we look at only one aspect (peak) you can always argue one person or another maybe - but overall it's Gretzky.

Playing defense was a weakness. As it was for Mario.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You know Gretzky lead the 90s in scoring too, right?

And you know he was -48 in the 90s, right?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think Gretzky has to be ranked in the top two.

Someone can argue that Orr had a higher peak. I think that's probably a true statement (but not by much). So if one were to rank Orr first, they'd have to ignore Gretzky's massive advantage in prime, consistency and longevity. That's fine - but then you couldn't rank Howe ahead of Gretzky too. In order to be consistent, you'd have to rank Gretzky second overall because he had a higher peak than Howe (having just taken the position that even a big edge in prime, consistency and longevity don't matter).

Similarly, one can argue that Howe should be first on the basis of his enormous prime, consistency and longevity, even if Gretzky had a higher peak. That's fine too - but then you couldn't rank Orr ahead of Gretzky, because you've just taken the position that prime etc. is most significant.

Lemieux was no better than Gretzky at his absolute best, and Gretzky had a longer/better prime, a longer/better career, and was better in the playoffs and international tournaments. There's no serious argument that he should be ranked higher all-time.

In summary - either Orr or Howe can be ranked ahead of Gretzky, but I don't see how both of them can be without the list being inconsistent.

When we voted I put Gretzky 3rd behind Orr & Howe. Call me inconsistent.

But I was a relative newbie then and just figured they were both better hockey players.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

... but for me Lemieux and Orr at their peaks were better players than Gretzky at his peak. I think everything played in Gretzky favour to have those kind of numbers...

Actually, I think Orr benefitted from an ideal situation much more than Gretzky did.
Orr brought his generational talent to a league that more than doubled in size (not to mention losing additional talent to a rival league) just as he was hitting his stride. Not to mention that there was little to no European presence, either. The LQ during Orr's peak was at it's lowest since WWII.

 

[overpass]

Actually, I think Orr benefitted from an ideal situation much more than Gretzky did.
Orr brought his generational talent to a league that more than doubled in size (not to mention losing additional talent to a rival league) just as he was hitting his stride. Not to mention that there was little to no European presence, either. The LQ during Orr's peak was at it's lowest since WWII.

Bobby Orr played his rookie season, 1966-67, in a very strong 6 team NHL. Here’s what he did.

• Orr was the first 18 year old to skate a regular shift in the NHL since Gordie Howe did it 20 years earlier in 1946-47. This was not an easy league for a teenager.
• Orr finished second in points by a defenceman and first in goals. He also set a league record for shots on goal from the defence position.
• Orr was +1 while playing big minutes for a Bruins team that had been awful for almost a decade. The Bruins were outscored almost 2-1 without Orr on the ice. Gilles Marotte was -41 on the second pairing.
• After the season, Orr was third in Norris voting, sixth in Hart voting, and was a second-team postseason all star. He was the first defenceman to be a postseason all star younger than 23 since Wally Stanowski in 1940-41, in the pre-war NHL. He finished second among defencemen in second-half all-star voting. Again, Orr was 18.

And finally, he showed everyone who watched him something they had never seen before and would never see again.

Bobby Orr was a dominant player in any quality of league.