King Forsberg
16 21 28 44 68 88 93
- Jul 26, 2010
- 6,192
- 59
212 pts seemed pretty unlikely until Wayne did it. By the time he hit 215, or Mario hit 199, I think people had forgotten just what an astonishing accomplishment those numbers really were. His 163 assists is more POINTS than any other player has ever scored besides Lemieux. I think he could get at least 150 in today's league. Especially if he grew up in today's environment with modern training, nutrition, etc.
That's what I was going to say... Gretzky's whole career was unlikely.
When he recorded his four 200+ pts seasons, to closest another player came was HoFamer Bossy with 147 pts, and that was his best season by a good margin.
So to say that it's unlikely that Gretzky would leave the best of today in the dust far behind is a bit silly considering he did it for many years before.
I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.
Take away Gretzky from the 1980s, and you'll see a different winner every year until Mario comes along. There were guys like Bossy and Yzerman who DID explode for huge years, but they couldn't beat those two guys. It's no different in that respect. Add Gretzky to the mix now, and the same thing happens. Gretzky beats all of them. Nobody won the Art Ross Trophy besides Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jagr from 1981-2001. That's 20 years. Take those guys away, and you have a different winner every single year -- just like today!I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.
And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.
He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.
Let me ask you this, if you put Crosby or Malkin in the days of Gretzky (which means subpar diets, training, etc.) How would they fare? What player back then would they most likely be like? Someone like Crosby, who is a student of the game, doesn't have the tools an resources like massive video footage archives, world trainers specified for hockey, dietary awareness, the internet information even. I believe these are a big part of why he is such a great player.
If you give all this to Gretzky, was he the kind of guy that would use this? Or just get by with the God-like talent he was born with?
I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.
And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.
He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.
Perfect place for me to get a question out... Do you think a player like Gretz would be allowed to play his game in todays NHL? I'm not so much singling out him as much as saying the offensive first player would be nipped in the bud by some lame coach even as early as peewee.212 pts seemed pretty unlikely until Wayne did it. By the time he hit 215, or Mario hit 199, I think people had forgotten just what an astonishing accomplishment those numbers really were. His 163 assists is more POINTS than any other player has ever scored besides Lemieux. I think he could get at least 150 in today's league. Especially if he grew up in today's environment with modern training, nutrition, etc.
I don't see what difference the soviets would have made either, had they played in the NHL. He faced them in 4 Canada Cups, and led all 4 in scoring. While the soviets TEAMS were as good as the Canadian ones, there was no individual Rusian player who would have threatened Gretzky's dominance. Maybe he would have won scoring titles by 60 instead of 70? That's about the biggest difference I can see.
I think he'd win the Art Ross every year but his relative dominance would take a significant hit. There were no Russians back then... 2 different Russians have won 3 Art Rosses in the last 5 years (and 2 different Swedes won the other two... not to mention a Czech owned for Art Ross for years). In any given year, there are a lot more stars today that can explode for a huge year.
And there was no cap back then... today Gretzky might have to be content with Pascal Dupuis on his wing, not Jari Kurri... maybe he'll have a Mark Messier behind him or a Paul Coffey at the point, but almost certainly not both. And he'll see less ice time. And the weak teams aren't as weak as they used to be, and he made it well known he had no mercy for weak teams.
He'd be the best but the days of winning the Art Ross with just his assists would be a distant memory.
I don't see what difference the soviets would have made either, had they played in the NHL. He faced them in 4 Canada Cups, and led all 4 in scoring. While the soviets TEAMS were as good as the Canadian ones, there was no individual Rusian player who would have threatened Gretzky's dominance. Maybe he would have won scoring titles by 60 instead of 70? That's about the biggest difference I can see.
I'll add that goaltending is alot different today than in the 80's as well. People need to give their head a shake and go back and look at save % in the 80's compared to the last decade.
40 and 50 goal scores were a dime a dozen in the 80's and in the last 6 years there have been exactly 12 guys 50 plus and only 44 over 40.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals
There isn't a lack of talent or skills in goal scoring, it's become alot freaking harder to score.
Let's look at the save % now.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html
During the last 6 years it has averaged at about .910 and in the 80's that we have figures for it's around .880 or so.
All teams are just so much better prepared to stop players from scoring.
My comments about Wayne's scoring were respectful, I consider him to be the best player of all time. At the same time the league is extremely competitive and has changed, why is this so hard for people to see?
A lot of time with Wayne, people only look at his age when he started to look human while forgetting that even though he was only 33 when he won his last Art Ross, it was already his 16th professional season. He played his first season at only 17.
He had averaged 90 professional games per season up till that point not even including Canada/World Cups.
So while he didn't play into his 40's like some recent players such as Jagr or Lidstrom, he still played more seasons than either of them, 21.
What's more...only in his final season did he fail to produce at a point per game or better.
At their peaks, I'm guessing Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin would be at least as good in terms of point production as anyone besides Gretzky. So that would by Yzerman, Bossy, Stastny, Savard, Hawerchuk, guys like that.
One can't say whether Gretzky would use all of the tools available, but I don't see why he wouldn't. He didn't need optical tracking with computer simulations of probably puck location, he just used a pencil, paper and his brain. If someone got by purely on talent, it might have been Lemieux more than Gretzky.
I'm probably being too nitpicky here, but just wanted to point out that:
- Gretzky played 1 WHA season, then 20 NHL seasons
- Lidstrom played 20 NHL seasons and did not play during the most recent lockout
- Jagr has played 19 NHL seasons, 4 seasons in the KHL/Czech leagues, and will likely play at least one more season somewhere (which depends on whether there's an NHL season in '12-13)
So while it's technically correct to say Gretzky played more prof. seasons than Lidstrom, it's more of a wash. Jagr has already played 2 more prof. seasons than Gretzky has, although 1 less NHL season due primarily to conditions that Gretzky did not face:
- a canceled NHL season in '04-05
- a CBA that makes it riskier for teams to offer longer contracts to players 35+
Although the WHA in '79 was of higher quality than the KHL in recent years, there was no professional hockey league of higher quality than either of them at those respective times AFAIK. Gretzky could not play in the NHL before '80 due to age. Jagr obviously could not play in the NHL in '05, since there was no season. He apparently couldn't receive a 2+ year NHL contract starting in '09, due to his age and teams being either too close to the cap or not willing to risk a 2+ year contract for a 35+ y/o player. It's hard to fault a player for going to the KHL, when there was no NHL season in '05, the rules effectively discriminated against his age group, and he could get a longer contract that effectively paid him more.
Right but my point was more about how much more hockey Wayne had played than either of those two by the age of 35 and was already in his 21rst season by age 38.
Age 35:
Gretzky 18th season
Jagr 16th season
Lidstrom 13th season (would of been his 14th without the lockout)
I'll add that goaltending is alot different today than in the 80's as well. People need to give their head a shake and go back and look at save % in the 80's compared to the last decade.
40 and 50 goal scores were a dime a dozen in the 80's and in the last 6 years there have been exactly 12 guys 50 plus and only 44 over 40.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals
There isn't a lack of talent or skills in goal scoring, it's become alot freaking harder to score.
Let's look at the save % now.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html
During the last 6 years it has averaged at about .910 and in the 80's that we have figures for it's around .880 or so.
All teams are just so much better prepared to stop players from scoring.
My comments about Wayne's scoring were respectful, I consider him to be the best player of all time. At the same time the league is extremely competitive and has changed, why is this so hard for people to see?
the 05-06 06-07 years were reminiscent of 90s hockey, just way too many scoring chances. i dont think those two years should even count for this era because they dont even seem to be from this era when you look back.The game changes and evolves but not to the extent some people suggest. The two highest scorers post lockout have been Thornton and an aging Jagr. Jagr was not close to a healthy Lemieux in their youth, and Mario head to head was not better than Gretz although close. Before theire respective medical issues began to erode their games there is a clear separation between 99/66 and everyone else. Jagr's performance with the Rangers, with plugs for linemates, doesn't support that post lockout players have consistenly had it that much differently unless you are keying on 2010-11. If we are saying nobody would get close to 200pts in 2010-2011 I think few would argue (same as 2000-2001), but I am pretty certain that in any year a 24 year old Gretzky would still be 40% ahead of the next player not named Mario.
What some people seem to be ignoring too is the injuries that Crosby has had. I don't consider his production to be "generational" since he started getting hurt and that has skewed the numbers. If he wins a scoring championship at age 19 is it likely that is his peak? Without the groin and ankle problems, and then the concussions, it is reasonable to assume he would have progressed since that 120 point season. Granted 06-07 was a soft year for defense based on the number of players who had personal scoring explosions, but a 19 year old scoring champ should be winning it every year.
In an environment where Henrik Sedin could score 114 points, Crosby should have done way more than 109pts, and at that time I was pretty certain he was playing with nagging medical issues. My point is that the guy should have had seasons of 150pts+, and if that had happened folks would not be trying to explain the lack of a runaway scoring leader today on some change in the level of difficulty when what it really meant was that the truly generational talent Orr, Gretz, Mario, Lindros, ____ was currently MIA due to injuries. I personally think Sid will never get back to his pre-injury level of play, but if he should manage to put it all together in one healthy career year, he would show why he belongs in the generation group. I think uninjured Sid could have been 140+pts last season and Gretzky maybe 160ish.
I tend to think todays training extends careers (Sakic, Selanne, Lid) and allows some lesser lights to leapfrog a few of their betters but there has been no changes in headfakes and blind passes that would significantly alter the success of the most offensively creative players.
The game changes and evolves but not to the extent some people suggest. The two highest scorers post lockout have been Thornton and an aging Jagr. Jagr was not close to a healthy Lemieux in their youth, and Mario head to head was not better than Gretz although close. Before theire respective medical issues began to erode their games there is a clear separation between 99/66 and everyone else. Jagr's performance with the Rangers, with plugs for linemates, doesn't support that post lockout players have consistenly had it that much differently unless you are keying on 2010-11. If we are saying nobody would get close to 200pts in 2010-2011 I think few would argue (same as 2000-2001), but I am pretty certain that in any year a 24 year old Gretzky would still be 40% ahead of the next player not named Mario.
What some people seem to be ignoring too is the injuries that Crosby has had. I don't consider his production to be "generational" since he started getting hurt and that has skewed the numbers. If he wins a scoring championship at age 19 is it likely that is his peak? Without the groin and ankle problems, and then the concussions, it is reasonable to assume he would have progressed since that 120 point season. Granted 06-07 was a soft year for defense based on the number of players who had personal scoring explosions, but a 19 year old scoring champ should be winning it every year.
In an environment where Henrik Sedin could score 114 points, Crosby should have done way more than 109pts, and at that time I was pretty certain he was playing with nagging medical issues. My point is that the guy should have had seasons of 150pts+, and if that had happened folks would not be trying to explain the lack of a runaway scoring leader today on some change in the level of difficulty when what it really meant was that the truly generational talent Orr, Gretz, Mario, Lindros, ____ was currently MIA due to injuries. I personally think Sid will never get back to his pre-injury level of play, but if he should manage to put it all together in one healthy career year, he would show why he belongs in the generation group. I think uninjured Sid could have been 140+pts last season and Gretzky maybe 160ish.
I tend to think todays training extends careers (Sakic, Selanne, Lid) and allows some lesser lights to leapfrog a few of their betters but there has been no changes in headfakes and blind passes that would significantly alter the success of the most offensively creative players.
Well, I already pointed out the reasons Jagr wasn't in the NHL during various seasons. He played one year in the top Czech league at age 17-18, just as Gretzky played one year in the WHA at age 17-18. Realize that Jagr started playing Jrs. at age 12-13, and took a lot more punishment than Gretzky during their respective NHL days. So I'm not sure if that's the best comparison to use. Before the '96 season when Gretzky turned 35 in Jan. and before the '07 season when Jagr turned 35 in Feb.:
Gretzky
1,093 NHL
180 NHL PO
80 WHA
13 WHA PO
TOTAL: 1,366
Jagr
1,109 NHL
149 NHL PO
70 Czech
32 KHL
20 Czech/KHL PO
TOTAL: 1,380
Jagr played more international games as well upto that point. As you said, Gretzky won his last Ross at age 33-34, while Jagr lost one by a nose at age 33-34 in one of the crazier races (Olympic year, winner traded and had two more games available).
I'm sorry but you're not honestly considering the seriously reduced travel times and lax 50 or so game scheds of the KHL and Czech league's the same as the 80 game scheds of the WHA and NHL are you....honestly?
Not to mention that Gretzky played all his games up to that point on a grueling West coast schedule.
C'mon man, Gretzky had at least 100-150 more NHL level games and easily triple the travel hours on Jagr by age 35.
It's not even close.
Gretzky was playing a full NHL sched at age 17, Jagr wasn't doing that kind of workload until he was 19. There's really no getting around that.