| Author |
 Topic  |
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
 Posted - 02/09/2007 : 18:39:18
|
Willus3 - if you mention me on hfboards, they'll go nuts but:
1. 99 had by far the greatest number of evenstrength goals against in NHLhistory. Thats right - for any player (1800 or so ESGA). That tells you that he was the greatest float at centre player ever. Always waiting for an outlet. The Bure of Canadian hockey.
2. Yes there was an NHL/NHLPA edict - dont touch Gretz since 1980 - he's our Larry Bird. Ironiclly just as Magic was better than Bird, Mario was far superior to 99.
3. If you watch his "big" games like his 5 goal game (50 in 39 games) or his 1993 G7 semis game - you will be appalled. His 5 goal game he was basically standing at centre the entire game - and was a +1 on the night!
He scores 5 goals and comes out a plus one???
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team. In the Finals against the Habs, 99 was invisible under Carbo's checking and the Kings went home to the beach in 5 games.
4. I wont even get into the bodyguards or his wanting out of Edmonton for the endorsements and that he was a minus player for the majority of his career.
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 00:39:38
|
Chooch, welcome to the forums. Not much hockey in Afghanistan eh? 
Well you gave us 4 reasons why he was "mediocre". How about 2857+ reasons why he was, and IS, the best player in the game.
894 goals (1st)
1963 assists (1st)
2857 points (over a thousand more than the next closest)
+518 (career)
4 stanley cups
9 Harts
5 Lester B. Pearsons
2 Con Smythe's
10 Art Ross'
5 Lady Byngs
60+ NHL Records
15 All-Star appearances
Hockey Hall of Famer (waived the waiting period)
Only player to have his jersey retired accross the league
How many times do we have to debate this? He is called the "Great One" for a reason. |
 |
|
|
ci_1612
Top Prospect
Canada
17 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 02:38:45
|
There is no doubt Gretsky was great at Hockey and better than mediocre but i somewhat agree he was always standing at centre waiting for the outlet..and while he played for the Oilers he had an All-Star cast playing with him..I still and always will say Lemieux was the greatest to play the game and i wish he had stayed healthy because i truly believe he would have surpassed some of Gretsky's numbers
Chris Illsley |
|
|
|
Guest8336
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 07:39:37
|
Chooch, I love ya man. Yeah the guys in the hfboard seem to be a little older set who have more of an idea about the history of hockey. No offense to anyone here.
Great points you made. I have always thought that the worst cherry pickers ever were Wayne and Rick Vaive.
Great point about the even strength goals too!! Supporters always try and say he was under rated defensively. It's just not true.
Yeah the bodyguard thing disgusts me actually. Fight your own battles in life.
Mario did have a superior game. No question.
And Leigh; He is called the great one yes, but not the greatest one. LOL.
Hey chooch wait till Beans sees this thread!! |
|
|
|
Guest8336
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 07:40:41
|
| Forgot to sign in again. damnit. That's me above. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 07:41:57
|
| Ok i'll try this again. This seems to be quite difficult for me. LOL |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 08:38:22
|
1) Who cares if he staked around neutral zone. That is what he got paid to do!!! His job was to put points on the scoreboard. He did that amazingly. If Gretzky never played special teams he would more than likely still be the highest point producer in history. Gretzky also had 277 power play and short handed goals. So, 1/3 of his goals were on special teams.
2) I have said all along that Wayne did get special treatment. So did most every superstar in every sport since the start of time. How does that take away from his talent?
3) Your whole argument on +/- is off. You are made comments about Wayne being a minus player for the majority of his career. 7 out of 20 seasons he was a minus player. Since when is 7 out of 20 the majority?? Also, he finished his career +518. You could argue that he should have been higher. You also made a comment that Mario was far superior to Gretzky. Mario had 1723 points and was +115 to finish his career. Gretzky has 2857 and was +518. To put that into perspective, for Mario to equal Gretzky's +/-; he would have had to have 7760 points. So, if your fact pattern states Gretzky was mediocre because his +/- was not great considering the points he put up, you must be saying the Mario was a total lemon! Even comparing Gretzky to #2 all time. Messier would have had to score 4654 points to equal Greztky's +/-. My point is that most if not all of the top scores in history don't have great +/-, but Gretzky's is still better than all of them.
4) Wayne did leave Edmonton. He also couldn't step out one foot out of his house without being mobbed by people. And, that has what to do with how good he was??
To be honest, I am getting really sick of the people trying to support their views with stat’s that don’t back up what they say. There are many things I can not argue about Gretzky. Was he protected? Yes. Was he a great defensive player? No. But, if you are going to makes comments as chooch did and attempting to use stats to back them up, make sure you are right. So, your "Strongest Arguments that Gretzky was Mediocre," is a sad attempt. All of the arguments you make against Gretzky here can be applied to all other players. If you say that Mario is superior then please tell me in what respect?? Statistically, I will knock you down every single time (see above.) You can tell me all you want about "What if Mario didn't get sick or hurt." And all the stuff about "Gretzky only played offense, and he was a cherry picker." I don't really care. If you come with stats, make sure they are right and defend them.
There is no way you can mathematically use statistics to prove anything against Gretzky offensively. Statistically speaking, he is the best offensive player in history. The rest is up for debate.
|
Edited by - Beans15 on 02/10/2007 08:39:55 |
|
|
|
semin-rules
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1915 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:17:54
|
haha nice profile Chooch..
Gonna be hard to make your team for your country in OC's topic eh?
Or meet someone else that likes hockey there
you are probobly the oldest person in these fourms or hockey fan
Anyway back to the topic......
I agree with Leigh, he is called "The Great One" because he did things that knowone else in history will ever do..
~~~~~GO STARS~~~~~ |
|
|
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:25:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Ok i'll try this again. This seems to be quite difficult for me. LOL
I've long admired your efforts to right one of sports history's greatest fallacies (and thats record number63). Keep up teh good fight on hfboards. To you and your friends there - from banned hands I pass thee the torch, be yours to hold it high.... |
|
|
|
I HATE CROSBY
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
538 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:28:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team.
I agree with SOME stuff you say...But that makes me cry a little.....Potvin was one of the best goalies in the show then, and while that game wasn't his best, calling him "a weak opposition" is a joke.....Calling the 93 team "lousy" is an even bigger joke........That team was a great group hockey players, coached by an all-time great.....I agree they were tired having those 2 tough series before.....But if you disrespect that team again (my all-time FAVORITE), you (and not some Crosby Lover) will be IHC's all-time nemisis (on the forum hahahahahahhaha).....
(But wayne was a bit of a goal suck)
I HATE CROSBY |
|
|
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:34:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
1) Who cares if he staked around neutral zone. That is what he got paid to do!!! His job was to put points on the scoreboard. He did that amazingly. If Gretzky never played special teams he would more than likely still be the highest point producer in history. Gretzky also had 277 power play and short handed goals. So, 1/3 of his goals were on special teams.
Ever wonder why he has 62 useless records? Ever watch his 50 in 39 game? Or his 4 goals in 3rd period record in 83 allstar game. Another pitiful goaldigging performance. I was embarrassed watching it - shamelessely trying for a 4th goal in a 12-3 (?) game all star game with 20 seconds left...no otehr player even remotely trying
2) I have said all along that Wayne did get special treatment. So did most every superstar in every sport since the start of time. How does that take away from his talent?
wrong - you couldnt even touch Gretzky without the refs, bodyguards. Zeigler Eaglson etc beating you up. 66, Crosby, Lafleur Orr etc might have had bodyguards but they were hit, banged up slashed etc etc. Lafleurs broken thumb, cheek, cuts, Marios broken hand, etc etc, Crosby hit viciously... only 99 didnt have to face that extent. Look what Shanny said about 68 recently...The difference is a matetr of degree.
3) Your whole argument on +/- is off. You are made comments about Wayne being a minus player for the majority of his career. 7 out of 20 seasons he was a minus player. Since when is 7 out of 20 the majority?? Also, he finished his career +518. You could argue that he should have been higher. You also made a comment that Mario was far superior to Gretzky. Mario had 1723 points and was +115 to finish his career. Gretzky has 2857 and was +518. To put that into perspective, for Mario to equal Gretzky's +/-; he would have had to have 7760 points. So, if your fact pattern states Gretzky was mediocre because his +/- was not great considering the points he put up, you must be saying the Mario was a total lemon! Even comparing Gretzky to #2 all time. Messier would have had to score 4654 points to equal Greztky's +/-. My point is that most if not all of the top scores in history don't have great +/-, but Gretzky's is still better than all of them.
Wrong again - if you add his +/_ for the last 11 tyears of a 19 year career he was a total minus and 11 is the majority of his career.
Ogopogo and you are right, +/- is not a great stat becasue guys like Mario played on weak teams and Larry played on strong ones. But it IS relevant for guys like Bure and Gretz who hung at centre and were a liability for their teams all in the name of scoring meaningless garbage goals to pad their meaniingless stats.
4) Wayne did leave Edmonton. He also couldn't step out one foot out of his house without being mobbed by people. And, that has what to do with how good he was??
huh??? He went to LA for the money and tried to blame his wife and then Pocklington. You bought it.
To be honest, I am getting really sick of the people trying to support their views with stat’s that don’t back up what they say. There are many things I can not argue about Gretzky. Was he protected? Yes. Was he a great defensive player? No. But, if you are going to makes comments as chooch did and attempting to use stats to back them up, make sure you are right. So, your "Strongest Arguments that Gretzky was Mediocre," is a sad attempt. All of the arguments you make against Gretzky here can be applied to all other players. If you say that Mario is superior then please tell me in what respect?? Statistically, I will knock you down every single time (see above.) You can tell me all you want about "What if Mario didn't get sick or hurt." And all the stuff about "Gretzky only played offense, and he was a cherry picker." I don't really care. If you come with stats, make sure they are right and defend them.
There is no way you can mathematically use statistics to prove anything against Gretzky offensively. Statistically speaking, he is the best offensive player in history. The rest is up for debate.
|
|
|
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:38:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by I HATE CROSBY
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team.
I agree with SOME stuff you say...But that makes me cry a little.....Potvin was one of the best goalies in the show then, and while that game wasn't his best, calling him "a weak opposition" is a joke.....Calling the 93 team "lousy" is an even bigger joke........That team was a great group hockey players, coached by an all-time great.....I agree they were tired having those 2 tough series before.....But if you disrespect that team again (my all-time FAVORITE), you (and not some Crosby Lover) will be IHC's all-time nemisis (on the forum hahahahahahhaha).....
(But wayne was a bit of a goal suck)
I HATE CROSBY
I liked Pat Burns too (dont know about all time great though)
just that 99 lovers cite that game as his best...not quite like destroying the Bruins in G7 of the 79 Semis. I mean that WAS the finals and one player destroyed the Bruins who could have easily won the cup. Gretz was invisible in the Finals in 93. |
|
|
|
leafsfan_101
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1530 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2007 : 17:54:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by I HATE CROSBY
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team.
I agree with SOME stuff you say...But that makes me cry a little.....Potvin was one of the best goalies in the show then, and while that game wasn't his best, calling him "a weak opposition" is a joke.....Calling the 93 team "lousy" is an even bigger joke........That team was a great group hockey players, coached by an all-time great.....I agree they were tired having those 2 tough series before.....But if you disrespect that team again (my all-time FAVORITE), you (and not some Crosby Lover) will be IHC's all-time nemisis (on the forum hahahahahahhaha).....
(But wayne was a bit of a goal suck)
I HATE CROSBY
For once, I agree with everything you say. LONG LIVE LEAFS NATION!!
GO LEAFS GO!!! |
|
|
|
bablaboushka
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2417 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 09:41:16
|
| Have we not been through this already? |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 11:46:58
|
Chooch, I thought this might be an insightful conversation as the one with Willus had been. Alas, you are an ignorant Gretzky hater who uses false information. I like the way you say that +/- applies to some but not all and that you only us it to trash Gretzky when I clearly proved that Mario was worse. And you fail to mention that Gretzky was +551 in his first 9 years. The Greatest Defensemen ever was at +597 in 9 years. Oh, ya, if forgot. +/- doesn’t apply to Gretzky. Use both sides of the argument if you want to compare. You can say that +/- didn't apply to Mario because he played on a weak team (Back to Back Stanley Cup Champs and 2 of the top 10 scorers in history must make for a weak team)?? However, you leave out that Gretzky’s teams were not so great after the LA trade. You can say that Gretzky left for the money to LA (When he was the highest paid player in the league at the time??) and keep thinking that the fact that Pocklington getting $15 million in cash for the trade was again Gretzky's fault. Don’t forget to omit that part too.
With that, I am done with this conversation. You can continue to look through the rose colored glasses you are wearing and continue your hate on Gretzky.
|
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 13:26:04
|
your comment about his 5 goal game and only being plus 1 did u consider how many goals were pp? cuz u dont get plus for those
CANUCKS RULE!! |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 14:35:45
|
Gretzky was a part of a team that GREW into a dynasty. They didn't come out of the gate winning cups, it took a few years. So many people say that gretzky was only as good as he was because he had great players around him. Then another camp always uses the argument that coffee, lowe, messier we only as good as they were because they had Gretzky. I hear both arguments all the time. The fact of the matter is that there are so many ways to choose the greatest player, and all have merit and you could make an argument for any one of them. Hell you could argue that some guy with the most blocked shots is the "greatest". Whatever. But when you see that hardly anyone has even come within a 1000 points of the guy, you just have concede.
curious, is there a stat out there of which skater has the most "wins"? I mean a player (other than a goalie) who has been in more games where his team has won. I've never heard of it. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 16:07:18
|
Chooch, you were banned from HF? That's a cryin' shame. You must have gotten a little ornery on there huh?
Anyway i just wanted to touch on one thing Chooch brought up. It's always irritated me when people say he owns the record book, he's got 62 records. I won't try and argue he set a lot of records, that would be just stupid. He does have a lot of them. But have you actually read through them? It almost seems like they made some records up just to give him another one. Seriously, there are quite a few redundant records there. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Willus |
|
|
|
Guest7078
( )
|
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 17:33:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Chooch, you were banned from HF? That's a cryin' shame. You must have gotten a little ornery on there huh?
Anyway i just wanted to touch on one thing Chooch brought up. It's always irritated me when people say he owns the record book, he's got 62 records. I won't try and argue he set a lot of records, that would be just stupid. He does have a lot of them. But have you actually read through them? It almost seems like they made some records up just to give him another one. Seriously, there are quite a few redundant records there. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Willus
Hey Willus3, Its chooch (cant seem to login)
Yeah I was banned not for being ornery but becasue I posted a list of my top players since I started watching in 71 and 99 was 8th - that caused Ogo and his henchman BBB KIng Donair to try and get me banned - they succeeded!
I'm not a gretz hater - I thought he was the 2nd or 3rd best Oiler after Mess and maybe Grant. Thats enuf to get you banned there!
I see Mr Bean is also of the same ilk. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 19:36:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7078
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Chooch, you were banned from HF? That's a cryin' shame. You must have gotten a little ornery on there huh?
Anyway i just wanted to touch on one thing Chooch brought up. It's always irritated me when people say he owns the record book, he's got 62 records. I won't try and argue he set a lot of records, that would be just stupid. He does have a lot of them. But have you actually read through them? It almost seems like they made some records up just to give him another one. Seriously, there are quite a few redundant records there. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Willus
Hey Willus3, Its chooch (cant seem to login)
Yeah I was banned not for being ornery but becasue I posted a list of my top players since I started watching in 71 and 99 was 8th - that caused Ogo and his henchman BBB KIng Donair to try and get me banned - they succeeded!
I'm not a gretz hater - I thought he was the 2nd or 3rd best Oiler after Mess and maybe Grant. Thats enuf to get you banned there!
I see Mr Bean is also of the same ilk.
That's ridiculous. I can't stand Ogo. Total meathead. I've been getting my jabs in with him though. He just doesn't get it though.
I'm not a Gretz hater either, but like you I don't feel he should be regarded as highly as he is. Out of curiosity what is your list?
Don't be too hard on Beans. He's just passionate about what he believes, just like you and I are. I doubt very much he'd try to get you banned from here. LOL. He and I had a great debate in another thread. The greatest player ever, in the polls section. Check it out if you haven't seen it.
|
|
|
|
Guest5029
( )
|
Posted - 02/11/2007 : 23:07:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
Willus3 - if you mention me on hfboards, they'll go nuts but:
1. 99 had by far the greatest number of evenstrength goals against in NHLhistory. Thats right - for any player (1800 or so ESGA). That tells you that he was the greatest float at centre player ever. Always waiting for an outlet. The Bure of Canadian hockey.
2. Yes there was an NHL/NHLPA edict - dont touch Gretz since 1980 - he's our Larry Bird. Ironiclly just as Magic was better than Bird, Mario was far superior to 99.
3. If you watch his "big" games like his 5 goal game (50 in 39 games) or his 1993 G7 semis game - you will be appalled. His 5 goal game he was basically standing at centre the entire game - and was a +1 on the night!
He scores 5 goals and comes out a plus one???
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team. In the Finals against the Habs, 99 was invisible under Carbo's checking and the Kings went home to the beach in 5 games.
4. I wont even get into the bodyguards or his wanting out of Edmonton for the endorsements and that he was a minus player for the majority of his career.
I certainly won't go along with Gretzky being mediocre.....that's plain ridiculous. This does however lead me to make one observation however. The fact that Don Cherry and scores of other Lemieux haters absolutely vilified Mario for being a "floater" early in his career and later to a lesser extent. Fact was that Gretzky was at least as much of one and was through his entire career. Mario actually became much more of a complete centre though certainly not Jacques Lemaire by any stretch. Mario showed his two way dominance especially in the cup years and years to follow in the playoffs. As d*** Irvin said and I'll paraphrase here. "Mario was the most dominant playoff performer I've ever witnessed in the two cup runs". To paraphrase Scotty Bowman " when Mario wanted to shut other teams down - nobody was better". Just a point not so much to bash Wayne but to point out to the asshats like 'I hate Crosby' who also hates Lemieux the plain truth that to people in Toronto especially, and other fans of 99, regarding Wayne's shortcomings 'here no evil see no evil' applies thicker than whale blubber. They're ever so quick to point out the shortcomings of any player that is deemed a threat to reach the heights of Gretzky's greatness and usually it's exaggerated, ill- willed criticism. This of course is primarily out of jealousy and resentment. |
|
|
|
Guest4930
( )
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 17:28:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5029
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
Willus3 - if you mention me on hfboards, they'll go nuts but:
1. 99 had by far the greatest number of evenstrength goals against in NHLhistory. Thats right - for any player (1800 or so ESGA). That tells you that he was the greatest float at centre player ever. Always waiting for an outlet. The Bure of Canadian hockey.
2. Yes there was an NHL/NHLPA edict - dont touch Gretz since 1980 - he's our Larry Bird. Ironiclly just as Magic was better than Bird, Mario was far superior to 99.
3. If you watch his "big" games like his 5 goal game (50 in 39 games) or his 1993 G7 semis game - you will be appalled. His 5 goal game he was basically standing at centre the entire game - and was a +1 on the night!
He scores 5 goals and comes out a plus one???
His G7 v. Toronto was nonsense - a weak opposition like Cat Potvin and a lousy tired Maple Leaf team. In the Finals against the Habs, 99 was invisible under Carbo's checking and the Kings went home to the beach in 5 games.
4. I wont even get into the bodyguards or his wanting out of Edmonton for the endorsements and that he was a minus player for the majority of his career.
I certainly won't go along with Gretzky being mediocre.....that's plain ridiculous. This does however lead me to make one observation however. The fact that Don Cherry and scores of other Lemieux haters absolutely vilified Mario for being a "floater" early in his career and later to a lesser extent. Fact was that Gretzky was at least as much of one and was through his entire career. Mario actually became much more of a complete centre though certainly not Jacques Lemaire by any stretch. Mario showed his two way dominance especially in the cup years and years to follow in the playoffs. As d*** Irvin said and I'll paraphrase here. "Mario was the most dominant playoff performer I've ever witnessed in the two cup runs". To paraphrase Scotty Bowman " when Mario wanted to shut other teams down - nobody was better". Just a point not so much to bash Wayne but to point out to the asshats like 'I hate Crosby' who also hates Lemieux the plain truth that to people in Toronto especially, and other fans of 99, regarding Wayne's shortcomings 'here no evil see no evil' applies thicker than whale blubber. They're ever so quick to point out the shortcomings of any player that is deemed a threat to reach the heights of Gretzky's greatness and usually it's exaggerated, ill- willed criticism. This of course is primarily out of jealousy and resentment.
http://www.nhl.com/hockeyu/history/gretzky/statsarena.html
This makes it clear as chooch has been syaing for a while , that Gretzky dined out on no dfence teasm fom the West and had little goal scoring luck in the East; His total goals in Montreal, Boston , Philly and Nj are weak.
Thats a very strong argument against him. Mario , Orr, Lafleur, Espo played in the tough checking East and still dominated. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2007 : 23:24:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4930
http://www.nhl.com/hockeyu/history/gretzky/statsarena.html
This makes it clear as chooch has been syaing for a while , that Gretzky dined out on no dfence teasm fom the West and had little goal scoring luck in the East; His total goals in Montreal, Boston , Philly and Nj are weak.
Thats a very strong argument against him. Mario , Orr, Lafleur, Espo played in the tough checking East and still dominated.
That doesnt prove anything, it just says what his stats were in all the arenas he played in, not what he got against other teams
CANUCKS RULE!! |
Edited by - Canucks Man on 02/14/2007 23:29:31 |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
|
|
Ryan Harper
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
322 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 11:14:51
|
Welcome those of you from HFboards. No pack mentality here and bans are only handed out to the idiots, and not for differing opinions.
Having said that, I totally disagree with you on the Gretzky was mediocre front. I may be a lot younger than you and my memories of Gretzky in Edmonton are cloudy, but he was far from mediocre. I can understand an argument that he is not the best of all time, but c'mon.
I am a Canucks fan and watched Pavel Bure play some amazing hockey for a number of years. He was a cherry picker and many of his goals were scored on the breakaway. But so what. Its part of the game and he could exploit it in a devastating way. I can admit that he is one of the best that I have ever seen play. Biased I know, but it is my opinion.
I would be interested to see your top players list.
"Some people skate to the puck. I skate to where the puck is going to be."
~Wayne Gretzky
|
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 12:01:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
This is a list of [Gretzky's] points against each team...
http://www.nhl.com/hockeyu/history/gretzky/statsclub.html
That is an amazing page of information. Guest 4930 you should take a look at it because it blows your theory out of the water. the only team he didn't have more points than games was Florida. Other than that he dominated every team, and some of them scoring a crazy 100% more points than games played.
Look I see the flaws G had. He floated a bit more than average (but it worked for his team), he didn't mix it up in the corners, other people fought his battles, and he played in a dramatically offensive time. But you just can't argue with the numbers. I could understand if someone was close, even within a couple hundred points. But that wasn't the case. Orr only played 8 or 9 full seasons, Lemieux had his battles with health. And longevity is a part of the equation whether you like it or not. Even Messier, Yzerman, and Howe couldn't catch him with equally long or longer careers. You may not have liked his style and that's ok but we play the game to score points (ie: to win) If your standards are different then you should clearly DEFINE what the greatest player's attributes should be so we can all be talking apples and apples. |
|
|
|
Guest0776
( )
|
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 12:20:48
|
| what about the defense men from boston in the 70" bobby orr. My Dad says by far he was better than both mario and wayne. I don't know the stats but if he did not have bad knee's he might have been the "greatest one". oh and messier sucks the only reason he is 2nd ahead of howie was because he played on edmonton. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 12:23:28
|
I find this discussion hilarioius.
So many uneducated hockey 'fans'?
I believe a debate over the greatest player of all time is interesting and justified (Gretz, Mario, Orr)... but come on people... all these guys were so good and so far ahead of their time, you cant for a minute critizing any of them!
|
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 12:48:48
|
The greatest player in hockey is opinion, until you look at the stats then it is reality...
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 13:53:44
|
Stats only work on players from the same generation and the same position. I will argue until I am dead the Gretzky was the best ever, but I can not, for one second, give a good comparison between Gretzky and Orr. Different position, different generations. It's all on opinion, not stats.
My arguement from the start is that to compare using stats alone will always point to Gretzky being the best offensive player ever. However, was what he accomplished better that Esposito and Orr in the 60's and 70's?? You can not say that objectively as they played in different eras.
|
|
|
|
bablaboushka
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2417 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 14:49:43
|
| Guys, please no debate about the greatest player, that discussion has come and gone. If you want to debate about Gretzky being mediocre, then carry on. |
|
|
|
Buick92
Top Prospect
Canada
73 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 15:55:44
|
Gretzky mediocre no debat there either he was great come on |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 19:52:37
|
Chooch wasn't making that stat up about Gretzky having the worst Even Strength Goals Against by the way. Here's the list of worst forwards.
Name GP ESGA Per Game
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22
Blaine Stoughton 526 564 1.07
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07
Doug Shedden 416 434 1.04
Mike Rogers 484 504 1.04
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02
Dale McCourt 532 540 1.02
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01 |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 20:00:32
|
I guess that makes Mario Mediocre also by .02
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 20:59:42
|
I'm not saying Gretzky was mediocre. I just wanted to make the point that chooch didn't just pull that stat out of thin air.
|
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 21:14:58
|
Don't forget he was on for more goals than against, or his +/- would be negative for his career, we always talk about players who won the cup, not the ones that lost it the most...
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 23:12:21
|
this is an impossible discussion, greztky had many flaws in is game, he was way better then mediocre but he wasnt a 100% complete player, he didnt hit very often, he didnt fight, and for ppl who say all he did wasa float, then how did he have more assits then goals
CANUCKS RULE!! |
|
|
|
Guest5029
( )
|
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 22:57:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Chooch wasn't making that stat up about Gretzky having the worst Even Strength Goals Against by the way. Here's the list of worst forwards.
Name GP ESGA Per Game
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22
Blaine Stoughton 526 564 1.07
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07
Doug Shedden 416 434 1.04
Mike Rogers 484 504 1.04
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02
Dale McCourt 532 540 1.02
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01
Sorry but these stats are meaningless without being qualified.
To keep it short here what people need to see is the 'effectiveness by era formula' that a university game up with 10 years ago. Take total goals scored by era (season by season) avg. That is, in a given season, what was the avg total amount of goals per game scored in the entire season when two NHL teams play. Gretzky's number's fall back to the rest of the greatest players ever to play when this formula is used. This is because the total goals per game avg. in Wayne's record breaking seasons were also the highest scoring era in NHL history. That is that when 2 teams played in Wayne's era, the total number of goals scored is way higher than say in Gordie Howes era. I am not bashing Wayne here or diminishing his accomplishments. When you see the players 'effectiveness' in his era statistically adjusted it is amazing to see that all of history's greatest players are ridiculously close by the numbers. In case your missing the point here take Gordie howe for example. In his era goal scoring was low but if the score was say 2-1 and How had 2 points, that would be like Gretzky getting 4 points in a 4-2 game. Hopefully that makes sense. What the formula does is measure a players effectiveness based on his points in relation to the total amount of scoring in his era. Like I said this puts all the greats ridiculously close and is quite amazing to see and makes all the old timers really happy LOL!. It is totally fair statistically. It also negates the above stat about even goals against because Wayne played in the highest scoring era. Think about it, the worst defensive forward in Gordie Howe's era could never get close to over a even strength goal against avg. like Wayne's because when two teams played they didn't even avg 3 goals total. In Wayne's era the avg total score in a game was like 7 goals. The even strength goals against career stats are completely worthless unless adjusted for scoring by era. Think about it. |
|
|
|
Guest5029
( )
|
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 23:02:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5029
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Chooch wasn't making that stat up about Gretzky having the worst Even Strength Goals Against by the way. Here's the list of worst forwards.
Name GP ESGA Per Game
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22
Blaine Stoughton 526 564 1.07
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07
Doug Shedden 416 434 1.04
Mike Rogers 484 504 1.04
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02
Dale McCourt 532 540 1.02
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01
Sorry but these stats are meaningless without being qualified.
To keep it short here what people need to see is the 'effectiveness by era formula' that a university game up with 10 years ago. Take total goals scored by era (season by season) avg. That is, in a given season, what was the avg total amount of goals per game scored in the entire season when two NHL teams play. Gretzky's number's fall back to the rest of the greatest players ever to play when this formula is used. This is because the total goals per game avg. in Wayne's record breaking seasons were also the highest scoring era in NHL history. That is that when 2 teams played in Wayne's era, the total number of goals scored is way higher than say in Gordie Howes era. I am not bashing Wayne here or diminishing his accomplishments. When you see the players 'effectiveness' in his era statistically adjusted it is amazing to see that all of history's greatest players are ridiculously close by the numbers. In case your missing the point here take Gordie howe for example. In his era goal scoring was low but if the score was say 2-1 and How had 2 points, that would be like Gretzky getting 4 points in a 4-2 game. Hopefully that makes sense. What the formula does is measure a players effectiveness based on his points in relation to the total amount of scoring in his era. Like I said this puts all the greats ridiculously close and is quite amazing to see and makes all the old timers really happy LOL!. It is totally fair statistically. It also negates the above stat about even goals against because Wayne played in the highest scoring era. Think about it, the worst defensive forward in Gordie Howe's era could never get close to over a even strength goal against avg. like Wayne's because when two teams played they didn't even avg 3 goals total. In Wayne's era the avg total score in a game was like 7 goals. The even strength goals against career stats are completely worthless unless adjusted for scoring by era. Think about it.
Then of course there's avg Ice time. If Wayne played 28 minutes a game wouldn't it make sense that he'd be scored against more? Do all players play 28 minutes a game? We know the answer to that!
Like I said totally worthless statistic. |
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 02/19/2007 : 04:58:35
|
I wolud like to read about this study, do you have a link to it ?
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Strongest arguments that 
