Gretzky was clearly the superior player and always beat Lemieux in head to head in every stats.
Lemieux had more points per game 7 out of the 12 seasons they spent together in the NHL.
Gretzky was clearly the superior player and always beat Lemieux in head to head in every stats.
Lemieux had more points per game 7 out of the 12 seasons they spent together in the NHL.
I count six: 1989, 1990 (barely), 1992, 1993, 1996, and 1997.Lemieux had more points per game 7 out of the 12 seasons they spent together in the NHL.
There are even arguments to be made that Crosby and McDavid are better than he ever was
I count six: 1989, 1990 (barely), 1992, 1993, 1996, and 1997.
Of course, Gretzky was past his prime in four of these six.
Get out of town with the 22 games business!Also 1994 Lemieux was ahead, that might not be included in some listings because he only played 22 games due to his back injury and cancer treatment.
As far as the best player ever goes, I can see legitimate arguments forI get all the old people who like Orr but it’s not close IMO.
People who vote otherwise are trying to be contrarian and hipster different.
As far as the best player ever goes, I can see legitimate arguments for
-- Gretzky
-- Howe
-- Orr
I don't see an argument for Mario simply because everything he did, Gretzky had already done faster, bigger, and better. Gretzky also led his teams to three times' more Finals appearances, twice as many Cups, and more first place finishes. As both players were basically offensive, it's not like Lemieux brings any special intangibles to the table, either; If anything that all goes in Gretzky's favor as well, as he was more mature faster.
I do see the argument for Orr and (esp.) for Howe. But with Orr, if we're looking at his nine years with Boston, we should compare that with Gretzky's nine years with Edmonton. In such a comparison, the hardware, record-setting, and Cup counting all goes in Gretzky's favor.
I have no argument with anyone positing Howe as the greatest.
With contemporary players, it's not only difficult to historically rank them because they're contemporary (which is always the case), but it's very hard in recent years because players no longer dominate peers to the degree they once did. We will have to wait years after today's players retire to properly evaluate Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid, etc.
12 first-team All Stars at right-wing says otherwise. Howe also led the NHL in PPG seven times, the same as Mario Lemieux, while bringing outstanding checking skills and a physical element that Wayne and Mario didn't have.It's the longevity and love of the game with Howe. But his actual skill set was a cut below generational
As for Gretzky vs. Orr, comparing a forward with a defenseman is TOO far from an "exact science". The only way I can look at it is to imagine 5 "Gretzky's" vs. 5 "Orr's" with equal goaltending, and I don't see the "Gretzky's" winning that one?
As for Gretzky vs. Orr, comparing a forward with a defenseman is TOO far from an "exact science". The only way I can look at it is to imagine 5 "Gretzky's" vs. 5 "Orr's" with equal goaltending, and I don't see the "Gretzky's" winning that one?
Your Profile pic would like say something about that.Which is why he lost Hart trophies to his own teammate. Prime Gretzky never lost to anybody. Not even close.
1993-94 is hardly "prime Gretzky."Your Profile pic would like say something about that.
In my opinion, Gretzky became the greatest player of all time (I'm never going to write "GOAT", which looks silly) in May, 1988, when the Oilers defeated Boston to win their 4th Stanley Cup in five years, and Gretzky won his 2nd Conn Smythe (though he probably could have had three or even four by then!).
At that moment, aged 27, this is what he had to show for nine NHL seasons:
-- 1669 RS points in 696 games (2.4 PPG, or 192 points per season for nine years)
-- 583 RS goals in 696 games (0.84 GPG, or 67 goals per season for nine years)
-- 1086 RS assists in 696 games (1.56 APG, or 125 assists per season for nine years)
-- plus 553 in 696 RS games (or +64 per season for nine years)
-- #1 all-time in RS assists (achieved by age 27)
-- 252 playoff points in 120 games played (2.1 PPG)
-- plus 89 in 120 playoff games played
-- #1 all-time in playoff scoring (achieved by age 26)
-- top 6 RS points' seasons in history (7 of the top 8)
-- top 8 RS assists' seasons in history
-- 7 Art Ross trophies (9 times PPG leader in 9 seasons)
-- 8 Hart trophies, all in a row
-- 2 Conn Smythe trophies (led the playoffs in scoring five times)
-- Seven times 1st team All Star, two times 2nd team
-- 3 x team finished 1st overall
-- 6 x team finished 1st in its division
-- nine playoff appearances in nine seasons, five trips to the Finals, four Stanley Cups
In addition to all that, he led three Canada Cup teams in scoring in three tournaments, with his team winning twice.
So, yeah, not bad for a guy who entered the NHL on an expansion team with two other protected players.
I believe if Gretzky had retired in summer 1988 (and never gone to L.A., etc.), most of us would still be ranking him the greatest player.
That's quite true. When Gretzky was spanking the Habs in '81 and tearing the League a new one in 1981-82, one of his (many) detractors was Maurice Richard, who said something to the press alone the lines of, "Gretzky is all right, but there's no way he could succeed in my era", or whatever. About a year later, Richard changed his tune, and said, "I have now seen Gretzky enough to say that in whatever decade he played, he would've been the scoring champion."Personally, I had no doubt he was the best of all time almost from the beginning. Certainly by the end of his third year. Watching him game in and game out you could see him do things over and over that no other player could even dream of. But it was much later when I think the majority of hockey people would have admitted that he was the best because it takes time for the record to catch up. In this respect I would say that the 1987 Canada Cup was the point where he really showed the world what he was all about.
That's right, also. It takes time for players to prove themselves. After his second season, I'd have ranked McDavid in the Oilers top-10, but outside the top five or six. Now, I'd probably rank him number three or four, behind only Gretzky and Messier (and possibly Kurri). Even though he's a better player already than Messier ever was (possible exception being the first half of 1989-90), he hasn't played a long time, won Cups, proven it in the playoffs, etc.These things are of course quite subjective. What does "best" even mean. For example I am 100% of the opinion that McDavid is already the second best player to wear the Oiler Jersey. But when will his complete record be enough to bypass the other Hall of Famers.