What if Gretzky never won a cup?

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
I agree with you that Gretzky's effect on elevating teammates is the greatest in NHL history.

I don't think it's an overstatement to say that Gretzky's presence in Edmonton, particularly in the years 1979 to 1984-85-ish, is why Coffey could win three Norrises, Kurri RS and playoff goals-titles, and Messier two future Hart trophies. Messier's is perhaps the most notable case. Messier was a 1-goal scorer in the WHA, and as an NHL rookie was briefly demoted to the AHL. Gretzky's presence sheltered him for 9 years in Edmonton, until he was ready to break out as a team leader. I also feel that Messier's playing at his personal-best elite level up to about 1996 or 1997 (which Gretzky did not) is a result of his years under Gretzky's celebrity-umbrella. Messier had more fuel in the tank later on.

(I'd say Glenn Anderson & Luc Robitaille are two Gretzky teammates whom Wayne had relatively lesser career effects on. Not that they didn't have their share of great moments on the ice with him, but I don't think their numbers pan out much differently with or without Gretzky.)
Yeah, Messier is totally the guy I always think of as benefitting the most from Gretzky's presence. It really grinds my gears whenever people say things along the lines of "Messier was the real captain of that dynasty" or "that the oilers won without Gretzky after he left proves they never really needed him". Just total garbage. Nevermind all the crap Wayne gets for not winning with L.A. while Messier is a God, the so called "greatest leader in ports" because of '94.

Anderson is an interesting case because he also gets a lot of credit for pushing Messier in those early years, almost as much as Gretzky does.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Yeah, Messier is totally the guy I always think of as benefitting the most from Gretzky's presence. It really grinds my gears whenever people say things along the lines of "Messier was the real captain of that dynasty" or "that the oilers won without Gretzky after he left proves they never really needed him". Just total garbage. Nevermind all the crap Wayne gets for not winning with L.A. while Messier is a God, the so called "greatest leader in ports" because of '94.

Anderson is an interesting case because he also gets a lot of credit for pushing Messier in those early years, almost as much as Gretzky does.

Messier did win two Cups post-Gretzky, as well as two Hart trophies.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
I agree with you that Gretzky's effect on elevating teammates is the greatest in NHL history.

I don't think it's an overstatement to say that Gretzky's presence in Edmonton, particularly in the years 1979 to 1984-85-ish, is why Coffey could win three Norrises, Kurri RS and playoff goals-titles, and Messier two future Hart trophies. Messier's is perhaps the most notable case. Messier was a 1-goal scorer in the WHA, and as an NHL rookie was briefly demoted to the AHL. Gretzky's presence sheltered him for 9 years in Edmonton, until he was ready to break out as a team leader. I also feel that Messier's playing at his personal-best elite level up to about 1996 or 1997 (which Gretzky did not) is a result of his years under Gretzky's celebrity-umbrella. Messier had more fuel in the tank later on.

(I'd say Glenn Anderson & Luc Robitaille are two Gretzky teammates whom Wayne had relatively lesser career effects on. Not that they didn't have their share of great moments on the ice with him, but I don't think their numbers pan out much differently with or without Gretzky.)

Messier was 17 years old when he started in the WHA, the youngest player in the NHL his rookie season. Had a lot to learn about the pro game and considering his style, I don't think he learned a lot of it from Gretzky.
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,118
It would be similar to Yzerman before his breakthrough in 1997.

Great player, but not a leader.

Not that I agree with that type of mentality, but that's what we deal with in the sports world.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Messier was 17 years old when he started in the WHA, the youngest player in the NHL his rookie season. Had a lot to learn about the pro game and considering his style, I don't think he learned a lot of it from Gretzky.
Now you're just being silly. (And Gretzky is 8 days younger than Messier.) I would say there is undoubtedly no one that Messier learned more from than Gretzky.

In a non-Gretzky Oilers' team, Mark Messier would have effectively been the team's top forward from 1981-82, if not 1980-81. He would have been expected to lead the team and carry the burden of offense (much as he was/did later in New York, c.1991 to 1996) from the early-80s.

What all those young guys learned from Wayne was not "how to play hockey" so much (although there was definitely that, too -- Mess learned to become a playmaking center after years of watching Gretzky do it), but rather how to be mature in pro sports, how to carry yourself publicly and deal with the media, how to prepare for every game, how to be cool under pressure, how to 'expect' yourself to win and be the best. And, as I already explained, they were all "sheltered" by Gretzky's presence for many years. With no Gretzky there to received 95% of the media acclaim and blame, Messier would have been dealing with it from day one.
 

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
Messier did win two Cups post-Gretzky, as well as two Hart trophies.
I'm not ragging on Messier, I just find the myth of his superhuman leadership really tiresome, especially when it's juxtaposed to that of Gretzky's, which is supposedly lesser(it's not).
 
  • Like
Reactions: wetcoast

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Now you're just being silly. (And Gretzky is 8 days younger than Messier.) I would say there is undoubtedly no one that Messier learned more from than Gretzky.

In a non-Gretzky Oilers' team, Mark Messier would have effectively been the team's top forward from 1981-82, if not 1980-81. He would have been expected to lead the team and carry the burden of offense (much as he was/did later in New York, c.1991 to 1996) from the early-80s.

What all those young guys learned from Wayne was not "how to play hockey" so much (although there was definitely that, too -- Mess learned to become a playmaking center after years of watching Gretzky do it), but rather how to be mature in pro sports, how to carry yourself publicly and deal with the media, how to prepare for every game, how to be cool under pressure, how to 'expect' yourself to win and be the best. And, as I already explained, they were all "sheltered" by Gretzky's presence for many years. With no Gretzky there to received 95% of the media acclaim and blame, Messier would have been dealing with it from day one.

And how do you know all of this?

Rookies learn from veterans, not from other rookies. From what I recall, Messier never had any problems dealing with the media.

So many things are attributed to Gretzky simply because he was Gretzky. As if he had all the answers from the get go. Gretzky himself said the Oilers didn't know what it took to be a champion until after the 1983 finals.

""We walked by their locker room in the corridor and saw after they won they were too beat up to really enjoy it and savor the victory at that moment," said Gretzky. "We were able to walk out of their pretty much scot free. We had so much respect for the Islanders players and the Islanders teams that we learned immediately you have to take it to another level in order to win a Stanley Cup. And that’s what we did. We learned from it and often credit for the Islanders players and Islanders teams for teaching us exactly what it’s all about and how hard it is to win."
 

TheEye

Registered User
Nov 4, 2018
191
132
Gretzky himself said the Oilers didn't know what it took to be a champion until after the 1983 finals.

""We walked by their locker room in the corridor and saw after they won they were too beat up to really enjoy it and savor the victory at that moment," said Gretzky. "We were able to walk out of their pretty much scot free. We had so much respect for the Islanders players and the Islanders teams that we learned immediately you have to take it to another level in order to win a Stanley Cup. And that’s what we did. We learned from it and often credit for the Islanders players and Islanders teams for teaching us exactly what it’s all about and how hard it is to win."

That's a lot of weight given to a guy who says a lot of crazy things.
 
Last edited:

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
13,491
10,046
It really bugs me when people say "Gretzky never won a cup after leaving Oilers, and Oilers won one without him - wow, he mustn't have been that good/important".

That's the exact wrong/dumb conclusion.

The correct conclusion is that hockey is a team sport, and no single player can carry a team to a championship without substantial support.
 

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
How do you know that?
Ask Messier. On any great team there is never just one leader. The guy who wears the C is the guy who has the unenviable task of facing the media, and Gretzky was the best at that.

Gretzky and Messier are completely different players and had completely different styles of "leadership". Messier's style was more in your face, whereas Gretzky was an eagle scout.

Many people seem to associate "leadership" with being "tough", and every ream needs a "hard man" but there's a lot more to it than that.

I think when you consider the fact the greatest player in the history of the game worked harder than anyone else, was always the first on the ice at practice and the last to leave, made everyone better his whole career, was the defacto ambassador of his sport, and somehow managed to exceed all expectations until his status became godlike, that you are basically looking at a level of "leadership" that you could not possibly ask for more out of a single human being.

I mean the guy was so valuable to his team you would do things you never thought you were capable of just for the chance to play with him. You wouldn't let anyone touch him either. That's leading by example.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Ask Messier. On any great team there is never just one leader. The guy who wears the C is the guy who has the unenviable task of facing the media, and Gretzky was the best at that.

Gretzky and Messier are completely different players and had completely different styles of "leadership". Messier's style was more in your face, whereas Gretzky was an eagle scout.

Many people seem to associate "leadership" with being "tough", and every ream needs a "hard man" but there's a lot more to it than that.

I think when you consider the fact the greatest player in the history of the game worked harder than anyone else, was always the first on the ice at practice and the last to leave, made everyone better his whole career, was the defacto ambassador of his sport, and somehow managed to exceed all expectations until his status became godlike, that you are basically looking at a level of "leadership" that you could not possibly ask for more out of a single human being.

I mean the guy was so valuable to his team you would do things you never thought you were capable of just for the chance to play with him. You wouldn't let anyone touch him either. That's leading by example.

So, you're basing this Gretzky leadership thing completely on your alternative definition of leadership.

And again, in terms of "working harder than anyone else":

How do you know that?
 

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
So, you're basing this Gretzky leadership thing completely on your alternative definition of leadership.

And again, in terms of "working harder than anyone else":

How do you know that?
What is YOUR definition of leadership exactly? I gave each player his due for displaying leadership in different ways, and while there is no way to actually quantify how "hard" anyone actually works, all Wayne ever did for 35 years was live and breathe hockey. No one knows exactly how many man hours that guy logged on the ice over that time but his commitment to practice is legendary. How else does a 7 year old embarass a league of kids 3 years older than him? The guy was a fanatic. And he had to keep that crazy work ethic up his whole career just to live up to his own reputation.

Leadership is called an intangible for a reason, but Messier's team success after "the trade" and Gretzky's lack thereof are each really blown out of proportion.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
What is YOUR definition of leadership exactly? I gave each player his due for displaying leadership in different ways, and while there is no way to actually quantify how "hard" anyone actually works, all Wayne ever did for 35 years was live and breathe hockey. No one knows exactly how many man hours that guy logged on the ice over that time but his commitment to practice is legendary. How else does a 7 year old embarass a league of kids 3 years older than him? The guy was a fanatic. And he had to keep that crazy work ethic up his whole career just to live up to his own reputation.

Leadership is called an intangible for a reason, but Messier's team success after "the trade" and Gretzky's lack thereof are each really blown out of proportion.

How are they blown out of proportion?

Messier captained 2 different teams to the Cup. Gretzky played 11 more seasons with one trip to the finals and a half dozen seasons of under .500.
 

scott clam

Registered User
Sep 12, 2018
1,108
532
How are they blown out of proportion?

Messier captained 2 different teams to the Cup. Gretzky played 11 more seasons with one trip to the finals and a half dozen seasons of under .500.
And Mark Messier won his first four cups with Wayne Gretzky as team captain. But nevermind that, because Messier was the "real" captain all along.

On the fifth Oilers cup Messier won with pretty much the same supporting cast as the fourth one. Yes give the man credit for stepping up and a well deserved Hart that year, but lets not pretend that it wasn't Billy Ranford who captured the Conn Smythe.

Messier got another Hart with New York and was huge in the Rag's cup, yet with all the legend surrounding "the guarantee" it was Brian Leetch who was named playoff MVP.

Contrast this with Gretzky who after a decade of utterly annhilating the NHL, has his first "bad" season, "only" leading the League's second scorer (Messier) by 13 points. The Oilers beat the Kings that playoffs and surely it was Messier's "leadership" that willed Esa Tikkanen into shutting down Wayne that year and the next one.

Gretzky has his last truly great season the next year and almost certainly wins the Hart, if not for voter fatigue, but then he gets hurt in the '91 CC, bad. So bad that many thought he was gonna retire in 93 only to bounce back with a 40 point playoff. Yeah he wasn't able to push the kings past Roy and the Habs but maybe things end differently if Robitaille or Kurri or the rest of the team steps it up while Gretzky has Carbonneau chained to his ass.

So what do we take from all this? That Messier had greater team success in the '90s because he displayed superior "leadership"? Or is it really just a matter of him playing on better teams and his body taking a longer time to break down?

And yet, for what it's worth, it was Gretzky, not Messier, who was the stud in the Rag's '97 playoff run. The last time either of those guys played in the playoffs.

We won't even talk about Messier's "leadership" in Vancouver or in his return to New York.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->