shazariahl
Registered User
- Apr 7, 2009
- 2,030
- 59
I've seen a lot of people rank Lemieux at 4th, and even say he's closer to 5th than 3rd, and I've even seen some people rank Gretzky at 4th before. I guess I'm curious why, especially in Gretzky's case.
Don't get me wrong, there are legitimate reasons to rank any of the big 4 at #1, but I can't really see any reason to rank ALL the other big 4 above Wayne. Any argument that elevates one, usually also lowers another. What I mean is, if you're going to rank Howe above Wayne, it's usually because of either his longevity/consistency, or a combination of that and his two-way play. But if your rank longevity that highly, it's hard to then turn around and rank both Orr and Lemieux above Wayne, given the gap in longevity he holds over both of them. If we say Orr and Howe because of toughness and two-way play, it's hard to then argue Lemieux, who was usually considered worse than Gretzky defensively, and despite his size was constantly getting hurt and injured. Also, he wasn't really any tougher than Wayne; he wasn't a fighter and didn't really grind it out in the corners. He was a bigger, stronger guy who played like a small finesse player.
It's also hard to rate all these 3 above Wayne when we look at things like playoffs or international play. No matter what category you look at, Gretzky is usually no worse than 3rd, and often has a much stronger case for 1st than anyone else.
Lemieux is a little harder to get upset about, granted. IMO he's pretty clearly behind Gretzky. But to say he's closer to 5th is very strange to me. He was the greatest offensive player in history aside from Gretzky himself. If he didn't have the misfortune of having to compete directly against Gretzky for so much time, he'd probably be seen even more favorably. I sometimes feel he gets underrated just because we saw him in the same league as Gretzky, and it's pretty hard to justify ranking him above Wayne when they played at roughly the same time and Gretzky just achieved more.
But IMO he's pretty clearly above the rest as far as offense. While lacking the longevity of Gretzky or Howe, he's still above Orr. And unlike Gretzky, who was still very good later in his career but no longer the best, there are arguments that could be made for Lemieux still being the best player in the league later in his career. Again, I realize missed games hurts him here, but he's still clearly above Orr in this regard. Also, IMO his playoffs are at least as good as Orr's, and seem to rank above Howe's. His international play is better than any except Gretzky IMO, though obviously that's due to having more exposure and opportunity. Still, you can't really say that Lemieux should have been better in any of these tournaments - he was always good, and usually brilliant.
That all being said, I'm open to ranking Lemieux at 4th. But I don't really see how anyone can say he's closer to 5th than 3rd. Much of the differences between Orr, Howe, and Lemieux seem to come down to what people value.
I'm curious why others rank players the way they do though. Not to start fights or arguments, but simply because I'm probably unaware of analysis that others here have done between these players. I'm still very open to having my opinions shifted, especially in regard to Lemieux, I just haven't heard any compelling cases.
Don't get me wrong, there are legitimate reasons to rank any of the big 4 at #1, but I can't really see any reason to rank ALL the other big 4 above Wayne. Any argument that elevates one, usually also lowers another. What I mean is, if you're going to rank Howe above Wayne, it's usually because of either his longevity/consistency, or a combination of that and his two-way play. But if your rank longevity that highly, it's hard to then turn around and rank both Orr and Lemieux above Wayne, given the gap in longevity he holds over both of them. If we say Orr and Howe because of toughness and two-way play, it's hard to then argue Lemieux, who was usually considered worse than Gretzky defensively, and despite his size was constantly getting hurt and injured. Also, he wasn't really any tougher than Wayne; he wasn't a fighter and didn't really grind it out in the corners. He was a bigger, stronger guy who played like a small finesse player.
It's also hard to rate all these 3 above Wayne when we look at things like playoffs or international play. No matter what category you look at, Gretzky is usually no worse than 3rd, and often has a much stronger case for 1st than anyone else.
Lemieux is a little harder to get upset about, granted. IMO he's pretty clearly behind Gretzky. But to say he's closer to 5th is very strange to me. He was the greatest offensive player in history aside from Gretzky himself. If he didn't have the misfortune of having to compete directly against Gretzky for so much time, he'd probably be seen even more favorably. I sometimes feel he gets underrated just because we saw him in the same league as Gretzky, and it's pretty hard to justify ranking him above Wayne when they played at roughly the same time and Gretzky just achieved more.
But IMO he's pretty clearly above the rest as far as offense. While lacking the longevity of Gretzky or Howe, he's still above Orr. And unlike Gretzky, who was still very good later in his career but no longer the best, there are arguments that could be made for Lemieux still being the best player in the league later in his career. Again, I realize missed games hurts him here, but he's still clearly above Orr in this regard. Also, IMO his playoffs are at least as good as Orr's, and seem to rank above Howe's. His international play is better than any except Gretzky IMO, though obviously that's due to having more exposure and opportunity. Still, you can't really say that Lemieux should have been better in any of these tournaments - he was always good, and usually brilliant.
That all being said, I'm open to ranking Lemieux at 4th. But I don't really see how anyone can say he's closer to 5th than 3rd. Much of the differences between Orr, Howe, and Lemieux seem to come down to what people value.
I'm curious why others rank players the way they do though. Not to start fights or arguments, but simply because I'm probably unaware of analysis that others here have done between these players. I'm still very open to having my opinions shifted, especially in regard to Lemieux, I just haven't heard any compelling cases.
