| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| shazariahl |
Posted - 05/13/2009 : 10:51:14
I was having a debate about this the other day with a co-worker. He feels these two would have done around 110-120 points in their best seasons (he figured Lemiuex around 120, Wayne around 110). I thought this was insanely low.
I don't think they'd be breaking 200 with the larger goal equipment, but Lemieux proved he could score in the height of the dead puck era at levels far higher than these, and Gretzky put up nearly 100 points in his last few seasons witht the rangers, who were horrible, and that was with a herniated back, at nearly 40 years of age.
With no 2 line passes, no hooking/grabbing/pulling, and the number of power plays in the game today, I see no reason these two couldn't still have put up 160-180 points in their best seasons. I think the biggest problem they would face would be the salary cap actually - teams wouldn't be able to surround them with the kind of talent they played with in their best years to put up "extra" 20-30 points they'd need to reach 200. But we saw what Wayne did on an LA team that was far from great, and Mario played the first part of his career on a crappy Penguins team before they got some talent for him to work with.
Also, in an era of shootouts, Lemieux would be almost unfair to other teams. And with so many power plays, I think Gretzky would have re-written the record books in a similar fashion to the way he actually did. Maybe I'm just biased; those are my 2 favorite players of all time. But I have a hard time believing these 2 would be struggling to beat guys like Crosby, Malkin, and AO in the scoring race with only 110 to 120 points.
|
| 6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| andyhack |
Posted - 05/14/2009 : 07:00:03
My guess would be between roughly 140 and 170 points, the higher end coming if they were on great offensive teams (particularly a team like the 80s Oilers - such a team not likely to ever be assembled again though).
So the answer, like about 77% of things in life, lies in the middle in the view. The era WAS most definitely a factor in some of their insane number seasons. At the same time, I do believe that they would produce more than Ovie/Crosby do today.
Might not consider them better players though |
| Guest4255 |
Posted - 05/14/2009 : 00:03:30
Gretzky did play in the clutching and grabbing era, but your forgetting that no one would dare touch him or they'd get dummied up by his body guards, he basically did what ever he wanted with the puck. Now take a look at the bulls*** Crosby goes through shift after shift and he still puts up 100 plus points a season. If he had it the way Wayner did he would put up double the points he does now guaranteed.
On another note i too watched the 88 oiler bruins final on cbc, you can just watch and tell that these guys look nothing out on the ice like the guys today, less speed, less strength, less puck control..but the biggest progression by far is the goal tending, it is at least 5 times better today. I watched Grant Fuhr let in the weakest goal i've ever seen , the puck was carried just over the blue line and slapped five hole, Fuhr didn't even move he just stood there, didn't even go down, it was like i was watching an 8 year old play street hockey. It's not just the upgraded equipment of today, goal tenders skills have progressed immensely.
Personally i don't think you can say crosby, malkin, and AO, dont compare to Lemiuex and Wayne. They are the next era of superstars, weve seen nothing like them in the last decade. |
| CaliforniaSeal |
Posted - 05/13/2009 : 22:43:12
Oates did get 142 points in 92-93 and I think he finished third or fourth for points that year.
No cup for Dino, what a shame |
| shazariahl |
Posted - 05/13/2009 : 15:33:32
I don't remember Oats finishing with 150 points ever and being 4th or 5th in scoring. In fact, I'm pretty sure Gretzky and Lemieux are the only players in league history to break the 160 pt mark (someone correct me if I'm wrong). In fact, most the "top" players in Gretzky's day were still 70 points back of him. Adjusted for era, guys like Bossy, Hull, and Dionne were pretty comparable to the current stars of today (Crosby, AO, Malkin). But Gretzky destroyed those guys in scoring. I don't see any reason he wouldn't do that to the stars of today as well, who don't dominate their peers (guys like Datsuk, LeCav, and St. Luis) by anywhere near the amount Gretzky or Lemiuex dominated theirs.
I think Lemieux would be almost unstoppable because back "in the dy" the only way to contain him was to clutch and grab. And with so many power play opportunities I think Gretzky would still put up record amounts of points. Those two weren't great because of the era, they were just great. |
| Guest4794 |
Posted - 05/13/2009 : 14:52:55
Sorry Guys,
Watched the 88 final the other night on CBC. There would be no crushing of record books. D men today have 7 foot sticks! I watched Ray Bourque playing with a shorty. The speed of the game today means that players earn points with tenacity (Crosby) and Power (Ovi) all the points G racked up by bobbing and weaving would be greatly diminished. Look at the secondary stars of those days...Oates used to put up a 150points and finish 4th or 5th in scoring. That does not happen today. Everyone can skate and meaning you need more than just hands or just vision. |
| leigh |
Posted - 05/13/2009 : 11:29:10
Gretzky retired in 1999...only ten years ago. In his final season he played 70 games and got 62 points on an ailing NYR squad. The 3 previous years he played full seasons and got 90, 97, and 102 points respectively.
Lemieux finally retired for good in the 05/06 season. In his final 103 games (he was injured a lot over the course of the final 2 years) he got 122 points.
I know some guys think ten years ago was a lifetime ago (perhaps it was for some members and guests) but it was not that long ago. Both played when players were just as big and fast as today. Goalie equipment was absolutely huge in the middle and end of G's career, essentially the same as it is now.
Now remember that they also played in the clutch and grab era of hockey. So in the new "tap me and you'll get a penalty" era they would excell! Both would complain vehemently about the holding and mugging that went on in the league. Gretzky was not huge but there are lots of 6' guys now that are stars. And tons of smaller guys like Kane, St. Louis and Savard who put up very good numbers.
Statistically speaking, if they were to play in their primes today, they would absolutely crush the current stars. Essentially if they were both healthy and in their primes (when I say healthy, I'm speaking mostly of Lemieux here), they would be putting up the same numbers as they did in the past...maybe more. |
|
|
