Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky? Will we know it?

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
Okay Mr small sample size (when it suits your purpose for Sid), lets look at the number of non Canadians over say a reasonable sample size in the top 10 in points.

As I'm sure you took the 86 sample year randomly right?

In goals it would be much different as the guys from Europe tend to be snipers in the NHL at the top.
Here is the amount of the non Canadians in the top 10 in scoring since 80 (Wayne's 1st season)

80-0
81-2
82-1
83-2
84-2
85-1
86-4 your random sample no doubt
87-1
88-3
89-3
90-1
91-0
92-2
93-3
94-4
95-4
96-5
97-5
98-6
99-6
00-5
01-7
02-5
03-5
04-5
05-zero, hell that must mean I'm wrong I guess:sarcasm:
06-4
07-2 (10 of top 20)
08-6
09-5
10-5
11-5
12-5

so as we can clearly see using your criteria of the top 10 scorers the increase was pretty much in the early 90's and has held constant till today.

It would be even more clear if we just had the number of guys as good as or better than the top 10 Canadians, as that's been pretty much how the NHL was for the entire time period pre 1980.



Well as you can see above, in the large and broad example, both can be and were true.

All you're showing here though is that there are now 90 guys getting first line minute spots and more importantly, first unit PP spots in the league instead of 63.
I'm sorry but you'll have to bring forth a lot more evidence (or even some evidence) to convince anyone that the select very top tier of players has increased.
Because all I see is a small group of 3-5 top players that are always there, that are clearly above the rest, just like the 70's, just like the 80's, just like the 90's. What I don't see is a Jagr like player (not quite yet with Crosby anyway) and I don't even remotely see a Gretz or Mario level player.


Really has it come to this?:shakehead

You're right, it was unnecessary. I didn't need to spell out what most already figured out :naughty:


Well we have alot of evidence that hitting is up and we can always go back and watch film too right?

Yeah, by all means go watch some film, please do!!!
Go watch the insane punishment that Bossy and Dino took around the net in the equipment they wore with lumber that actually was real lumber.
While you're at it, go look up some interviews of Hawerchuk, Trottier or Lafountaine talking about injuries, not even really knowing what concussions were or about the mentality of being tough and not reporting things, playing through them.
Seriously, give your head a shake and research this stuff a little, no, A LOT more first.



Well it's pretty obvious that the league has at least 43% more talent looking at the top 10 finishes from the 80's to 90's to today.

That's before we look at goalies and Dmen of course.

Saint33 claims that he doesn't care where the makeup of NHL talent comes from but we can see quite clearly at the top with top 10 scoring that there always has been the norm (top 10 Canadians in scoring) and now they compete with probably an equally talented group of elite non Canadian talent (as evidenced by the top 10 scoring breakdown).

For the life of me how in the name of God can this change not matter when evaluating players from different eras?

Anyone on that island of thought that a top 10 finish in 1970 is the same as post early 90's is drowning in the overwhelming evidence against it.

Hey, I would have no problem if we got rid of the whole top 10 idea and increased that number by the same % as the league increased in teams.
Top 10 in '85 becomes the top 12 in '95 and the top 14 in '05.
The thing is though, we're still going to see the same names over and over and over again in the top 3-5 every year while the "tier II" players fight over literally a point or 2 to hold on to one of the other spots in the top 10/12/14.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Hardy, are you still clinging to that whole "Canadians in the NHL comparison" thing? On its best day it is a weak argument. Gretzky had a ton of stars trying to compete with him during his day and as we have seen with actual physical evidence in front of our own eyes in the precise seasons Lemieux didn't seem to care what country you came from, he just dominated the NHL at different stages in his career. Isn't it about time this argument jumps the shark now?
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Bottomline, no one is going to convince me that Gretz, Mario or Jagr lose the Art Ross to a Sedin EVER!!! Or even come close to losing one to them.
And no one is going to convince me that Malkin or Stamkos should be ahead of Stastny or Bossy at this point.

Yeah, Stamkos has a ways to go in order to get to Bossy all-time. I don't think Stamkos has had a singular season quite as good as Bossy's yet either. Stastny and Malkin are close with each other at their best which is why they make a good comparison for the 1980s. Gretzky demolished Stastny time and time again. I really think the sad thing is Gretzky is going to turn into a Walt Disney type of myth. People will just think he is a figurehead instead of what he actually accomplished. Sort of like Walt, he created an empire from the ground up with elbow grease and hard work and is one of the greatest innovators known to man. But the further we get away from these eras of these men the more "mythical" they become for some reason despite having the ability to look anything up about them.
 

tazzy19

Registered User
Mar 27, 2008
2,268
116
Hardy, are you still clinging to that whole "Canadians in the NHL comparison" thing? On its best day it is a weak argument. Gretzky had a ton of stars trying to compete with him during his day and as we have seen with actual physical evidence in front of our own eyes in the precise seasons Lemieux didn't seem to care what country you came from, he just dominated the NHL at different stages in his career. Isn't it about time this argument jumps the shark now?
Yes, but Hardyvan still hasn't acknowledged how Gretzky managed to win the Canada Cup scoring title in all 4 Canada Cups he played in -- dominating the best of the world's best. If he can do it there, why couldn't he do it in the much more diluted NHL? His argument is completely non-sensical.
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
Just out of curiousity Hardy, who? 10 guys are a LOT of guys to pick from. Wayne I will agree is #1. Mine too. But if we isolate it to being able to pick one player to integrate the 1992 Pens you don't even have Mario on the top 10? The Pens almost certainly don't win either of their Cups without him. I suppose you could put Richard ahead of Mario just because of his clutch play, maybe Beliveau too. After that, it gets a little hairy. Howe played in 5 Cup finals after his last Cup so if you think even Mr. Hockey doesn't have some "what ifs" in his playoff career then you're wrong. Orr? 1971, 1973, 1974, 1975. Could have done a lot more in those years to win. They all have times just like Mario where they could have won more. Who are these 10 players you'd pick?

I wasn't talking about only 92 specifically but for his career compared to others.

I would rather ahve the leadership and intangibles of Wayne, Richard, Jean, Clarke, Forsberg, Sakic, Crosby, Yzerman, Larinov, Federov and tTrotts just to name several forwards off the top of my head.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
I wasn't talking about only 92 specifically but for his career compared to others.

I would rather ahve the leadership and intangibles of Wayne, Richard, Jean, Clarke, Forsberg, Sakic, Crosby, Yzerman, Larinov, Federov and tTrotts just to name several forwards off the top of my head.

You would rather have had one of these guys leading the Penguins during Lemieux's tenure than Mario himself? A team that was built around him quite specifically? Im not sure I follow you on this comment Hv or am I misreading your intent? Perhaps you mean "if I was building a team from the ground up Id pick a Gretzky, Beliveau, Larionov or Trottier over Mario". Correct?... either way, doesnt appear your very high on #66 huh?
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
Yeah, Stamkos has a ways to go in order to get to Bossy all-time. I don't think Stamkos has had a singular season quite as good as Bossy's yet either. Stastny and Malkin are close with each other at their best which is why they make a good comparison for the 1980s. Gretzky demolished Stastny time and time again. I really think the sad thing is Gretzky is going to turn into a Walt Disney type of myth. People will just think he is a figurehead instead of what he actually accomplished. Sort of like Walt, he created an empire from the ground up with elbow grease and hard work and is one of the greatest innovators known to man. But the further we get away from these eras of these men the more "mythical" they become for some reason despite having the ability to look anything up about them.

I don't know about that Stamkos and his 60 goal season in 12 is mighty fine.

Here are the goal scorers that he was competing against the top 10

Stamkos 60
Malkin 50
Gaborik 41
Neal 40
AO 38
Perry 37
Kessel 37
Hartnell 37
Kovy 37


I won't even go into the obvious here but Stamkos scored at 120% of the 2nd place guy.

And for a historical apples to apples comp he scored at a 150% rate of the next highest Canuck.

His 4 year goal scoring run rivals any 4 year run of Bossy, even with the Europeans and States guys.
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
You would rather have had one of these guys leading the Penguins during Lemieux's tenure than Mario himself? A team that was built around him quite specifically? Im not sure I follow you on this comment Hv or am I misreading your intent? Perhaps you mean "if I was building a team from the ground up Id pick a Gretzky, Beliveau, Larionov or Trottier over Mario". Correct?... either way, doesnt appear your very high on #66 huh?

Obviously Mario has more offensive talent than the guys I listed.

I'm talking about intangibles like leadership defensive play, the commitment to team play and winning I would take the guys I listed for their career over Mario.

At the end of the day, a ton of talent and secondary leadership was shipped into Pittsburgh for those 2 SC runs, perhaps more than any other time in history.
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
Hardy, are you still clinging to that whole "Canadians in the NHL comparison" thing? On its best day it is a weak argument. Gretzky had a ton of stars trying to compete with him during his day and as we have seen with actual physical evidence in front of our own eyes in the precise seasons Lemieux didn't seem to care what country you came from, he just dominated the NHL at different stages in his career. Isn't it about time this argument jumps the shark now?

the evidence was pretty clear in the top 10 in scoring from 80-12 that the makeup of elite talent has changed.

Unless one wants to argue quite a drop in elite talent of Canadians, you know the hockey mad country which is still the reigning hockey superpower, has dipped quite a bit there is a different bar post mid 90's than before.

It's clear as the light of day, whether one chooses to look at it is another matter as is the reasons why one wouldn't.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
I would rather the leadership and intangibles of Wayne, Richard, Jean, Clarke, Forsberg, Sakic, Crosby, Yzerman, Larinov, Federov and tTrotts just to name several forwards off the top of my head.

Obviously Mario has more offensive talent than the guys I listed. I'm talking about intangibles like leadership defensive play, the commitment to team play and winning I would take the guys I listed for their career over Mario. At the end of the day, a ton of talent and secondary leadership was shipped into Pittsburgh for those 2 SC runs, perhaps more than any other time in history.

An interesting perspective & opinion Hardy. I think the only one of that grouping that I'd select over Lemieux would be Beliveau, but even then it would be like 1A&1B or vise-versa, then Yzerman. No point in running down your other picks as they were all tremendous talents... and yes, your quite correct about the Penguins Salad Days, obviously a lot of brilliance landing in Pittsburgh, gifted & gritty players.
 

Morgoth Bauglir

Master Of The Fates Of Arda
Aug 31, 2012
3,776
7
Angband via Utumno
An interesting perspective & opinion Hardy. I think the only one of that grouping that I'd select over Lemieux would be Beliveau, but even then it would be like 1A&1B or vise-versa, then Yzerman. No point in running down your other picks as they were all tremendous talents... and yes, your quite correct about the Penguins Salad Days, obviously a lot of brilliance landing in Pittsburgh, gifted & gritty players.

As much reverence as I have for Beliveau I'm still not so sure I'd pick him over Mario.
 

billybudd

Registered User
Feb 1, 2012
22,049
2,249
Will we ever see a better player than Gretzky?

Possibly. Not sure I'd count on it, though.


Will we know it?

Absolutely not.

As hockey becomes more systemic and more controllable factors such as fitness become more and more important, the degree to which outlier talent results in outlier performance will drop (already has, actually, started in the late 90s).

So if, say, Connor McDavid (just to avoid slaughtering anyone's sacred cow) ended up with better vision, more creativity, better hand-eye coordination and a higher hockey IQ than Wayne (he won't, but just for the sake of discussion) it would not result in overperformance of his peers to anywhere near the degree that was seen with Gretzky.

So it would, essentially, be impossible to identify McDavid as "better than Gretzky" in any objective way. Even though, in an absolute sense in this pure hypothetical that I don't actually believe will happen, McDavid would be better.
 

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
I don't know about that Stamkos and his 60 goal season in 12 is mighty fine.

Here are the goal scorers that he was competing against the top 10

Stamkos 60
Malkin 50
Gaborik 41
Neal 40
AO 38
Perry 37
Kessel 37
Hartnell 37
Kovy 37


I won't even go into the obvious here but Stamkos scored at 120% of the 2nd place guy.

And for a historical apples to apples comp he scored at a 150% rate of the next highest Canuck.

His 4 year goal scoring run rivals any 4 year run of Bossy, even with the Europeans and States guys.


And that's fine.
I for one can def see a valid discussion involving Stamkos vs Bossy, in the short term at least. Career-wise, Stamkos still has a ways to go though.
I also noticed that you didn't disagree with the Stastny vs Malkin comparison.

How did Gretzky do against Bossy and Stastny again? :sarcasm:
Sid isn't even remotely close to dominating Stamkos and Malkin the way Gretz did Bossy and Stastny.

Apples to apples eh :sarcasm:


Know what else is funny...here we are talking about who are pretty much the 3 very best players in the league today and it's 2 Canadian's and one non-Canadian, same as it was 30 years ago....funny eh ;)
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
And that's fine.
I for one can def see a valid discussion involving Stamkos vs Bossy, in the short term at least. Career-wise, Stamkos still has a ways to go though.
I also noticed that you didn't disagree with the Stastny vs Malkin comparison.

How did Gretzky do against Bossy and Stastny again? :sarcasm:
Sid isn't even remotely close to dominating Stamkos and Malkin the way Gretz did Bossy and Stastny.

Apples to apples eh :sarcasm:


Know what else is funny...here we are talking about who are pretty much the 3 very best players in the league today and it's 2 Canadian's and one non-Canadian, same as it was 30 years ago....funny eh ;)

I didn't comment on the Statsny-Malkin comp because that's not what I was replying to but while we are at it, Statsny was never the player Malkin is when he is on top of his game.

I like Statsny but barring injuries Malkin is going to pass him in the next 2 maybe 3 years on the all time center list, if not sooner.

The facts on the elite top 10 scorers example you posted were completely proven wrong and bamm it doesn't exist in your world.

Keep looking at tiny samples instead of the big picture.
 

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
I didn't comment on the Statsny-Malkin comp because that's not what I was replying to but while we are at it, Statsny was never the player Malkin is when he is on top of his game.

I like Statsny but barring injuries Malkin is going to pass him in the next 2 maybe 3 years on the all time center list, if not sooner.

That's a possibility, I also have no problem saying that BUT it hasn't happened yet and RIGHT NOW they are pretty comparable and that's the real point because after 7 seasons they are about even and after 7 seasons Gretzky was blowing Stastny right out of the water. Sid is not even remotely close to doing the same to Malkin.

The facts on the elite top 10 scorers example you posted were completely proven wrong and bamm it doesn't exist in your world.

Where was it proven wrong???


Keep looking at tiny samples instead of the big picture.

If by big picture you mean you want me to actually believe that simply increasing the amount of players and teams in the league means an equal increase in talent, ESPECIALLY very top talent then no.

When the league was 24 teams strong and already had all the best of the newly liberated Russians and Czechs in the league already.
Are you honestly trying to make us believe that when 6 more teams were added that there was an equal increase in elite talent with those newly added 150 or so players???
Don't make me laugh!
Out of those newly added 150 or so spots, you would be lucky to get a couple of surprise tier II players coming in, there might be a Tier I through the draft but by far the vast majority were tier III and mostly tier IV players that couldn't have even made the NHL when it was only 24 teams.
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
As much reverence as I have for Beliveau I'm still not so sure I'd pick him over Mario.

Ya thats a real tough one, tough call. I was lucky enough to have watched Beliveau throughout the latter half of his career, from like about 60/61 on, and he surely was a piece of work. Hell of a hockey player who was just total class. Never have I seen the like of that since. He was in stature & style very much like Lemieux though far more two way and obviously not as talented offensively but... in just terms of smart, hockey IQ & leadership, natural innate skill's etc, easily superior to Mario on several levels from what I saw though on balance between the two Im calling it pretty even. Would be fascinating to either have Lemieux transported back in time or Beliveau sent forward, see how either would've made out. Very similar players, Beliveau the Elder, Lemieux the Younger.... oh, and remember SP; if your travelling through time & into the future & you see someone whipping by into the past? Prolly best if you dont make eye contact.
 

Yamaguchi*

Guest
Malkin has already proven he deserves to be ahead of Stastny:

the Hart Trophy, 2 Art Ross Trophies and the Smythe
 

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
Malkin has already proven he deserves to be ahead of Stastny:

the Hart Trophy, 2 Art Ross Trophies and the Smythe

The Smythe is the only trophy that holds any real weight for such a claim.
Minus Gretzky, Lemieux and their cronies, Stastny has an Art Ross and is 1 point off a second.
Malkin doesn't get a sniff at an Art Ross from 1980-2001 just like every single other player not named Greztky, Lemieux or Jagr.


And if all we're doing is trophy counting, Malkin should be ahead of Crosby too then :sarcasm:
 

Yamaguchi*

Guest
The Smythe is the only trophy that holds any real weight for such a claim.
Minus Gretzky, Lemieux and their cronies, Stastny has an Art Ross and is 1 point off a second.
Malkin doesn't get a sniff at an Art Ross from 1980-2001 just like every single other player not named Greztky, Lemieux or Jagr.


And if all we're doing is trophy counting, Malkin should be ahead of Crosby too then :sarcasm:




Malkin was ahead of Crosby when he was awarded the Smythe in 2009.

He got 2 Art Rosses -- this fact also indicates the he is a top-notch player. Ergo, Malkin is in the same echelon with Crosby.
 

Yamaguchi*

Guest
And neither of whom are in the same echelon as Jagr thus far in their respective careers.


Yeah, right....

And Bob Nystrom would knock out all of them with a couple of punches - your favourite Jagr, Malkin and Crosby.

Neither of them was in the same echelon as Bob.
 

revolverjgw

Registered User
Oct 6, 2003
8,483
19
Nova Scotia
The Smythe is the only trophy that holds any real weight for such a claim.
Minus Gretzky, Lemieux and their cronies, Stastny has an Art Ross and is 1 point off a second.
Malkin doesn't get a sniff at an Art Ross from 1980-2001 just like every single other player not named Greztky, Lemieux or Jagr.


And if all we're doing is trophy counting, Malkin should be ahead of Crosby too then :sarcasm:

If you're going to play the "remove Gretzky and Lemieux" card, it's only fair to consider Ovechkin. Stastny never faced any Russians like that, a huge advantage. He doesn't win an Art Ross if he's competing with a prime Ovechkin, and minus Ovechkin, Malkin (I know he himself is Russian but it doesn't matter) adds another one.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->