Would you take Prime Gretzky, or Prime Crosby and Malkin?

[ItWasJustified]

As an athlete Gretzky would be at a considerable disadvantage today as most NHL players go through essentially professional training regimens from early on. The edge that his serious approach earned him in the 1970s is largely no longer there. What is left is a skillful player with an exceptional vision, but that alone is not enough to dominate all aspects of the game anymore.

This doesn't disprove my thesis at all. A young Gretzky today would also go through professional training regimens from early on, and the fact that you think the overwhelming majority of NHL players in the 70s and 80s weren't serious is just laughable.

 

[Albatros]

This doesn't disprove my thesis at all. A young Gretzky today would also go through professional training regimens from early on, and the fact that you think the overwhelming majority of NHL players in the 70s and 80s weren't serious is just laughable.

1970s hockey professionalism:

 

[Kuznetsnow]

Wow, that's pretty damn unspectacular. All this does is make Crosby and Malkin look even better...

No it just makes you look clueless about those players. Prime Gonchar, Letang, Fleury, Staal and Kessel were better than any third wheel McDavid or Drasaitl had by a country mile aside from maybe a season of Taylor Hall. But hey McDavid and Drasaitl got some quality time with Kassian, Maroon, Koskinen and Nurse while he was learning to tie his skates

 

[ItWasJustified]

1970s hockey professionalism:

1970's minor hockey professionalism.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Somebody posted recently (I have not checked this) that i you don't count assists Gretzky had to Kurri, Coffey, Anderson and Messier he is still the all time assists leader. I dont think he needed them as much as you think

Gretzky was incredible, and was obviously the catalyst. I'm saying that a team may need more than Gretzky to win a cup though, which is what this poll is about.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

They can do either or and thrive, whereas Crosby and Malkin tended to suck when put on the same line instead of being able to bang out a few quick goals at will.

87 and 71 completely dominated when they shared the ice together, which they really haven't done in a decade. The Penguins are more successful when they individually lift up their lesser linemates, at the cost of their own point totals.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Gretzky was incredible, and was obviously the catalyst. I'm saying that a team may need more than Gretzky to win a cup though, which is what this poll is about.

Edmonton won without Gretzky but Gretzky didn't win without Edmonton. One player no matter how good isn't enough.

 

[Captain97]

Tough one since the extra cap that comes along with taking Gretzky would probably be enough for a really good winger. It's a toss up but I went with the duo.

Thus was part of my thought process as well.

Prime Gretzky can at most make 15 million where as Malkin and Crosby probably make 12 a piece.

So you could have Gretzly a good 2C + a 2W for that same cost in free agency. And you have Gretzky so people will sign with you.

 

[Breakfast of Champs]

If prime Crosby and Malkin are guaranteed to play 75+ games a season and be healthy for playoffs I might take then but prime Gretzky was much more durable than the duo was.

 

[SimpleJack]

Do you take Robitaille and Shanahan above Gretzky ? (and I took clear case HOF player and not more borderline case Ciccarelli-Glenn anderson or Andreychuk and 2 that did play a lot without injuries issues has well).

If I was the 1980 Oilers I do not trade Gretzky for those 2.

Yup, assuming everyone is in their prime. You split them up and each anchors a line. You put the right pieces around them. As great as Gretzky was he can only play on one line at a time(like everyone else). I mean I suppose you could always double shift him on each of the top 2 lines, but that’s not logical.

The 80s Oilers teams were more a product of their depth of firepower than Gretzky’s individual greatness. It says a lot that they were able to win another Cup even after Gretzky was traded. You swap him for those 2 and that dynasty would still have been just as historically dominant.

 

[nowhereman]

No it just makes you look clueless about those players. Prime Gonchar, Letang, Fleury, Staal and Kessel were better than any third wheel McDavid or Drasaitl had by a country mile aside from maybe a season of Taylor Hall. But hey McDavid and Drasaitl got some quality time with Kassian, Maroon, Koskinen and Nurse while he was learning to tie his skates

You want to start throwing around the words "clueless", when it's you who thinks Gonchar was still in his prime in 2009? Or that 21 year old Jordan Staal was a superior player to RNH, who has flirted with PPG the last few seasons? Letang was a sophomore, when the Penguins won their first Cup (and was injured in another run), and nowhere near as good Nurse is right now. Hell, the third and fourth leading scorers on the 2009 team were Ruslan Fedetenko and a 38 year old Bill Guerin, followed by Talbot, Kunitz, and Kennedy. And Fluery? The guy the team pushed out, after likely costing them more Cups with his wildly inconsistent choking? Hilarious that you throw out a "maybe Hall", when Hall was superior to every single winger Sid/Geno have ever played with outside of Kessel (which is probably a wash) and Hossa for 12 regular season games.

The narrative that the Oilers are a tire fire, outside of McDrai, is just lazy excuse-making. Sid/Geno didn't need excuses.

This is the 2009 roster that won them their first Cup (Sykora was out most of the playoffs):

71	Evgeni Malkin	C	82	35	78	113	80	17	24	14	22	36	51	Russia: Magnitogorsk	22
87	Sidney Crosby	C	77	33	70	103	76	3	24	15	16	31	14	NS: Cole Harbour	21
11	Jordan Staal	C	82	22	27	49	37	5	24	4	5	9	8	ONT: Thunder Bay	19
17	Petr Sykora	C	76	25	21	46	36	3	7	0	1	1	0	Czech Rep.: Plzen	31
26	Ruslan Fedotenko	F	65	16	23	39	44	18	24	7	7	14	4	Ukraine: Kiev	29
81	Miroslav Satan	L	65	17	19	36	36	3	17	1	5	6	11	Slovakia: Topolcany	33
48	Tyler Kennedy	R	67	15	20	35	30	15	24	5	4	9	4	ONT: Sault Ste. Marie	22
58	Kristopher Letang	D	74	10	23	33	24	-7	23	4	9	13	26	PQ: Montreal	21
24	Matt Cooke	L	76	13	18	31	101	0	24	1	6	7	22	ONT: Belleville	29
9	Pascal Dupuis	L	71	12	16	28	30	1	16	0	0	0	8	PQ: Laval	29
25	Maxime Talbot	C	75	12	10	22	63	-9	24	8	5	13	19	PQ: Le Moyne	24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Incredible center depth surrounded by a bunch of spare parts. Yeah, looks unstoppable... Compare that roster to, say, Tampa. Not close.

I'm well aware that the Oilers don't have a juggernaut team, as I likely watch them more than you do out West. But the excuses are only going to take McDrai so far.

 

[McFlash97]

Wayne "The Great One" Douglas f***ing Gretzky!

In his prime, shredding the league, and imagine the marketing around the guy hitting 200 plus yearly.

 

[nowhereman]

Wayne "The Great One" Douglas f***ing Gretzky!

In his prime, shredding the league, and imagine the marketing around the guy hitting 200 plus yearly.

Do I really need to explain to you why this wouldn't even come close to happening, literally, ever? Seriously, now...

Gretzky came along at the absolute perfect time for his career/legacy. The league was only a decade out of significant expansion and there had never been a greater discrepancy between elite talents and the rest of the league. Goaltending was inferior, systems were grade-school level, analytics didn't exist, Europeans had only just started to migrate to the NHL and players literally smoked, drank and snorted cocaine in dressing rooms. Oh and it was the highest scoring decade of hockey in history.

The idea that Gretzky would put up 200+ points in today's game is laughable at best.

 

[paulmm3]

Crosby and Geno because I get two elite centers that way rather than just one. Even if Gretzky is the GOAT

 

[Sweetpotato]

99

EZ

 

[amnesiac]

depends whos my 2C with Gretzky

 

[Midnight Judges]

Hf is getting this wrong.

Gretzky is easily the greatest player of all time but a team with him + average players isn't going to be as good as a team of Crosby/Malkin + average players.

Hockey fans and media constantly overrate the impact of a single player on a team.

Gretzky never won a cup without 5 or 6 other hall of famers. Neither did Lemieux. In fact peak Lemieux couldn't even get his team into the playoffs back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in.

44 minutes a night of Crosby and Malkin is just going to have a greater ice tilting effect than 25 minutes of Gretzky. People have clearly not thought this through.

 

[82Ninety42011]

Gretzky just remember could turn just about any decent player into an all-star. To put it into perspective the best season Crosby and Malkin had combined was 2008-2009 and they combined for 216 points. Gretzky put up seasons of 212,196,205,208 and 215 in a row now add a second player to 99 and well shows how he dominated. He played just as well in the playoffs too I'm taking Gretzky. This would be a nice problem to have choosing between the two options though.

 

[Voight]

I don't think people realize Gretzky was a Art Ross contender from his first game to his last game. While he did lose a step after Suter's dirty hit, he was still a threat to lead the league in points every year.

 

[Thenameless]

I'd go with Gretzky and here's the reason. All three of these guys would be max salary players. So, you still have room to add something decent to Gretzky. It isn't two against one. What if it was Gretzky with Toews, or Bergeron, or Doughty, or Karlsson? I chose players that were not quite as dominant as prime Malkin, but any of these guys could be enough to tip the balance.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

If prime Crosby and Malkin are guaranteed to play 75+ games a season and be healthy for playoffs I might take then but prime Gretzky was much more durable than the duo was.

Crosby and Malkin have only missed the playoffs once each and their team has never missed the playoffs in 14 years.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

I'd go with Gretzky and here's the reason. All three of these guys would be max salary players. So, you still have room to add something decent to Gretzky. It isn't two against one. What if it was Gretzky with Toews, or Bergeron, or Doughty, or Karlsson? I chose players that were not quite as dominant as prime Malkin, but any of these guys could be enough to tip the balance.

You're literally creating an alternate reality so you can justify picking 99. Crosby and Malkin took considerably less than the max salary multiple times.

 

[MMANumminen]

I'd take Gretzky 1 on 1 for anyone except maybe Mario but in this case I'd take the Pens duo

 

[Thenameless]

You're literally creating an alternate reality so you can justify picking 99. Crosby and Malkin took considerably less than the max salary multiple times.

Not really. The fact is it's still a team sport with a salary cap, and Gretzky would cost less than Crosby and Malkin combined. So in essence, you have more room to add something better to Gretzky. You're right in saying that Crosby and Malkin took less, but who's to say Gretzky doesn't do the same in this alternate reality. Either way, Gretzky at 13M is what I would choose over Crosby at 12M and Malkin at 12M, if we don't know the rest of the teams' composition.

 

[jbeck5]

Don't forget the option with Gretzky opens up another spot in the forward group.

So it's not 100pts +100pts vs 200pts.

It's 100pts + 100 pts vs 200 pts + ??? Maybe ~50 points? Or maybe that second line 50 point player plays on Gretzky's wing and puts up 90 points.

Gretzky for me no question.

To put things in perspective, it's like asking if you want one 100 pts player or two 50pts player.

Do you want Jagr or Smolinski and McEachern.