| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest7936
( )
|
 Posted - 04/10/2008 : 23:19:30
|
| Just for my reply he crashed between 01 and 04 But seems to rebound hehe |
 |
|
|
Guest4146
( )
|
Posted - 05/09/2008 : 11:56:37
|
| Gretzky is the best player on the pure and simple fact he did all that he did with all the pressure the game, the business, the politics and the negativity that goes along with turning the hockey record books upside down and inside out. I've seen more interviews from Alexander Ovechkin than I ever did see from Mosieur Lemieux. SO don't blame it on the language barrier! The big man avoided the role of great player. Mario put himself above the game. He had a great game one quick interview head home for wine. Wayne had a big night he stuck around to share it like a young kid who just scored his first goal. He showed his excitement for the game and shared it, it was infectious, all fans who watched him could not wait to see what he was going to do next. Mario was great and absolute pleasure to watch, but never did catch the imagination of young kids my age growing up during that era like Gretzky did. Just because he had cancer does not propel him closer to Gretzky or Orr. He had cancer and back problems and blah blah , whatever. If only the general public could have access to the health care system hockey players get. Within an hour of getting hurt they already releasing reports on the X-ray and MRI results. The better player one on one is without a doubt Mario Lemieux. The best player one on Five Bobby Orr. The best player 1 on League Wayne Gretzky. He did it all while being a crappy skater, a weak shooter, couldn't hit, couldn't fight, couldn't play defense, couldn't, couldn't do this couldn't do that. What he could do is show up everynight and create magic! Steve Nash is another example of the best player in the league is one who can make his team better. The game today is so fast and the passing and the moves these players can do at high speed is unreal. No player today can manipulate the game the way Gretz did. I like Crosby but I love Ovechkin's enthusiasm and his love for the game, he plays to and for the crowd, the fans, the media, etc... I grew up watching Gretzky and Lemieux. My son's favorite hockey player is Wayne and he has never seen him play. His legacy lives on beyond his retirement and accomplishments. Gretzky tried to share the stage with Mario but would not take it. If you look at Jagr it is not too hard to see he showed the same passion as resentment towards the league that made him rich. You can look at Messier and see he had the same respect and passion for the game and look where he sits in the league records, who did he play with again? Love it or leave it dems' the facts. |
|
|
|
KeithQuinn
Top Prospect
41 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2008 : 14:32:09
|
gretzky
gretzky
gretzky
gretzky
gretzky
gretzky's worst season was better than lemy's
best season
duuuuhh
|
Edited by - KeithQuinn on 05/14/2008 14:35:14 |
|
|
|
Guest9935
( )
|
Posted - 07/01/2008 : 13:30:54
|
It is hands down Gretzky. It doesnt matter what way a person scores points it is plain and simple the fact that he scored more points by far than any other player. You can battle skill or speed or anything but the way Gretzky played the game gave him the abilty to dominate and score more points than any other. The point to this little game called hockey is to score more goals than the other team! Gretzky didnt stop there, he was a natural leader and he made everyone around him better, as did Mario. Gretzky played more games won more cups. The way he played the the game kept him relativly healthy throughout his career. Mario's way of playing the game added to his unfortunate back inuries amongst others.
its is Gretzky and a close second is Lemuix.
And i am a flames fan and still love Gretzky! |
|
|
|
Guest2598
( )
|
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 08:53:36
|
Statistics provide little help in the Gretz vs Lemieux debate. What you have to rely on is visual evidence and expert testimony.
Personnally, as a player, I have never so much enjoyed watching Gretzky play - I felt he even looked clumsy on the ice. But what matters is that what he was doing was working, and pretty well !
As for Lemieux, he was alien to his time, and probably to the future of the game too. He will still look good on recorded games in 50 years from now. Everything he did on the ice looked like it was from another league way above the NHL. Everybody knows about his shooting skills, but what impressed me the most was his passing game and his game without the puck. This alone is enough to rest the case : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb7M9JVnPO4
And the following testimonies, Gretzky unfortunately cannot match :
"He's the best player I've seen since I got into the league in '67. I've always said he's the most complete player I've seen..." -Scotty Bowman
"No disrespect to Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe, Mark Messier, Bobby Orr, Gilbert Perreault ... but Mario did things nobody else could ever do." - Bryan Trottier
"In my mind the most talented player I've ever seen." - Bobby Orr
"He was the best player I've ever seen, I've ever played with." - Jaromir Jagr
"While Wayne Gretzky seemed to be two steps ahead of everyone else, and Bobby Orr played as if he had the puck on a string, Lemieux's skill was an uncanny ability to create the illusion he was working outside hockey's space-time continuum." - CBC Sports
All in all, the perception that Gretzky was better than Lemieux likely rests mostly on his supernatural statistics. But Lemieux's magic is also immortal, although only to those who had the chance to really see it.
|
|
|
|
MSC
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
601 Posts |
Posted - 07/29/2008 : 09:41:20
|
I've given this alot of thought and decided this is nothing more then an excercise in frustration....
So in order to decide I pitted them against each other in a game of one on one pond hockey shinny (in my head of course)...
Lemieux came out on top....unfortunatly hockey is a team game so it doesn't really matter who would win in a one on one situation. |
|
|
|
Guest7102
( )
|
Posted - 11/15/2008 : 09:32:17
|
listen no doubt in my mind gretzky is a great player but look who he had on his team messier, paul coffey ,yari kuri all hall of fame players then in los angelos he had marcel dionne but mario lemieux its on after 6 years before superstars started coming to hes team like jagr ron francis but those during hes 7 th year were rookies so for me mario lemieux he madeplayes litterally better other players did not make him better because he was already the best so its MARIO LEMIEUX for me
|
|
|
|
Guest0112
( )
|
Posted - 11/15/2008 : 10:25:51
|
| grtzgy is god |
|
|
|
Axey
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
877 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2008 : 11:23:52
|
This will never end plain and simple.
Chicago Blackhawks GM
Jesus didn't tap. |
|
|
|
Guest0112
( )
|
Posted - 11/15/2008 : 11:33:53
|
| Mario lemieux is truley the most skilled of the two mario also has size and im not quite sure who faster but im sure lemieux gets the nod ,but having said all that it would seem to me Grezgy would have to battle through alot more adversity than mario because of his size and skill level (COMPARED TO LEMEIUX) but some how he did get passed all of the adversity and jacked up close to 900 goals and close to 2 grand in assists and managed to rewrite the nhl record book along his merry way .lets just pretent Mario throws up another another g in points hes still sitting 150 points back of gretzgy ,in fact lemeiux sits #7 on the all time scoring list ,i never heard an arguement that ronnie francis or marcel dionne was ever the best to play the game or compared to gretzgy. so i have compiled an accurate account of what the order of greats exist in and here they are 1gretzgy ,,2 messier 3 stevie y 4 ron francis 5 tony tanti 6 mario lemeiux ..............im taking gretzgy in my pool aqny day |
|
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 14:18:46
|
| Gretzky with out a doubt |
|
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2008 : 14:38:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by 1 Crosby fan
I voted Lemieux Because he didn't even play 1000 games(did he i am not sure)and what is 5th or 6th on the all time points leaders what if he had played more games how much points would he have if he played each game in his career, well that's my 2 cents
Rank Name GP PTS PPG
1 Wayne Gretzky 1487 2857 1.92
2 Mark Messier 1756 1887 1.07
3 Gordie Howe 1767 1850 1.05
4 Ron Francis 1731 1798 1.04
5 Marcel Dionne 1348 1771 1.31
6 Steve Yzerman 1514 1755 1.16
7 Mario Lemieux 915 1723 1.88
Lemieux is 7th all time Point scorer in History of NHL. Gretzky only played 571 more games than Lemieux there is no way Lemieux would have ever produced another 1134 in 571 games he just wasn't that good. Gretzky had the better Points Per Game Average. Lemeiux has never had a 200 Point season where Gretzky has had 4 in the NHL which is amazing. He also ended up with 970 more Points than the closest person to him with 269 games less. No one can Compare to Gretzky he was by far the best hockey player of all time no doubt about it |
Edited by - hanley6 on 12/30/2008 14:41:52 |
|
|
|
Guest8801
( )
|
Posted - 01/17/2009 : 06:33:17
|
I'm not trying to take anything away from Mario. I'm really not. He was perhaps the most exciting player to ever lace a pair of skates. But I think that's part of the problem with this debate. Since we were told not to use stats, we have nothing but opinion. And Mario was more exciting. But that doesn't mean he was better.
At some point, you HAVE to look at the numbers. To me, these are crucial points:
1. Wayne had more assists than anyone in history has career points. That means if Wayne had never scored a single goal in his career (and let's not forget he scored more goals than anyone ever), he'd still have more points than Mario.
2. The teammate myth. Both players had great talent around them in their prime. Wayne had more talent. But he also won scoring titles on the Kings, who were the 4th worst team in the league when he went there. Also, for all their talent, none of Wayne linemates ever won a scoring title. Jagir won a few when Mario wasn't healthy.
3. Kurri was a great trigger man, but did he ever score 50 in 39? Did he ever get 92 in a season? No - for all his scoring prowess, he never came close to any of Wayne's scoring dominance. People want to dismiss some of Wayne's accomplishments because of the quality of his team, but none of them were close to any of Wayne's records or point totals. Guys like Orr, on the other hand, had people like Esposito breaking records of their own. I realize that's not entirely fair since they played different possitions, but you hopefully take my meaning. No one was close to Wayne. For a guy to be getting 130+ assists many of those years, yet still to score that many more goals than the people he's assisting is actually a mathematically staggering feat.
4. Post season, Wayne was unbelievable. His PPG, hat trick performances, etc mark him as one of the greatest clutch players in hockey history. Some complain that he didn't win another cup since leaving the Oilers, but he never played on a good team really since. Mario didn't win any cups on bad teams either. Wayne did, however, take the Kings to the finals; without him on that team, would they have even made the playoffs? It is questionable.
5. Much has been said about Wayne's playmaking. This can't be overstated. Not only does he have the most assists in a career and for a single season, he also has the 2nd most for a season. And the 3rd. And 4th. And 5th. 6th. 7th. And 8th... tied with Mario. In other words, Wayne best 7 seasons are all better than Mario's top season for assists. Yes, Mario was one of the greatest playmakers ever. But he's not even close to Wayne in this respect.
I just think Gretzky brings more to the table. He had the longevity, the better peak value, the more clutch playoff performances, leadership, and his power to elevate everyone else's game. Mario was a more awe-inspiring skater (his rushes were things of legend), but Wayne changed the entire game with his behind the net play. It wasn't as pretty to watch for some people, but in the end, the stats prove it was more effective.
|
|
|
|
Guest6030
( )
|
Posted - 01/17/2009 : 08:09:55
|
There are too many uknown factors to say whose the all around better player. However, I have followed both GREATS careers. Everyone knows that on a record breaking level, know one will ever shatter Gretzky's record. On a talent level, I give the edge to Lemieux. Here's the reasons why.
I have never seen a player that can use his skill, size, and talent like lemieux. This guy was just so fun to watch. He was just amazing one on ones, at times he had several players on him and would amazingly come out with the puck and score a highlight goal or assist. He was just phenominal in any situation he was in. What I remember the most about him is as difficult as it was to score or make a play, he made things look soooooooooooooooo easy. It was like a walk in the park for him.
I also remembered him playing with back problems. His back was in so bad shape that he couldn't bend over to tie his skates and would still rack 3+ points in those conditions. But here's what I remember the most about him. He had a few 8 point nights in his career, one of them truly amazing. He had 5 goals and 3 assists that night, dont remember which team it was. What truly impressed me was the way he scored his goals. Each of his goals were scored in a different way (even strength, power play, short handed, breakaway, and empty net). I think he was the only one ever to achieve this in the NHL. Anways, one of those goals I remember, he was on the side of the net near the boards. And there was just enough space for a puck to go in the net and he did. It was amazing what this guy was able to do on the ice. He scored several goals that way. At times he would bang some pucks off skates and p layers on purpose and they would go in. And yes they were intentional, if you watch the tapes and here his comments, you would believe it. This guy was able to score practically anywhere on the ice.
Alll this to say that Gretzky was amazing, cant take that away from him, but i believe that we will never see a player that has the skills, strenghts and smarts as Lemieux. Too bad he was slowed down by health problems. That's why i say we will never know whose better, Gretzky ot Lemieux, but of w hat i seen of Lemieux, his talent his superior than the Great One.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2009 : 08:59:25
|
After you read the last post, it's really hard to argue that Gretzky was better than Lemieux.
Wait a second.....
How about this:
Lemieux had size, speed, strength, and the best set of hands to ever be attached to a hockey player.
Gretzky was not a great skate, didn't have a hard shot, was all of 6' tall and 185 lbs.
Yet Gretzky some how found a way to be the most productive offensive player in history???
How does that happen??? |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2009 : 16:28:54
|
Let's say God looked at this year's Boston Bruins and said, "Man, I have given this team A LOT of key injuries lately, haven't I? Maybe I should plop down on them for the rest of the 2009 year some superduperstar forward from the past".
So God arranges a meeting with you, the manager of the 2009 Boston Bruins, and the two of you meet for a chowdaaa near the Causeway. After apologizing for wiping out a good portion of your team while they are having such a great year, God (played by Denzel Washington by the way) says to you,
"Ok, for the rest of the year I'll let you have either:
a) Wayne Gretzky at his peak; or
b) Mario Lemieux at his peak"
Your assistant (played by Hanley6 by the way), says, and I quote,
"No one can compare to Gretzky he was by far the best hockey player of all time no doubt about it"
Do you just take Gretzky without a second thought?
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2009 : 16:41:52
|
Um, yes. I do. Gretzky, at his peak, was the most prolific offensive producer in NHL history. So, knowing that I have more than a capable Defense along with 2 very solid goalies, I bring in 1982-93ish Gretzky and put him on a line with Lucic and and Ryder. That makes my second line Savard, Kessel, and Wheeler. Between those two lines, there is not a team in the league that could stop them both for a 7 games series. I play firewagon hockey and I simply outscore the opponents. I have the firepower to do it. I have the goalies to make the key saves, and I have a decent defense.
Secondly, Gretzky at peak value was the most impactful playoff player in history. As an example, he took the 93 Kings with basically one line worth of forwards, a couple of d-men towards the end of their career and a few reasonable rookies along with average (at best) goaltending and carried the entire team to the Cup final. And, they would have won that series if they didn't run into the best goalie to ever play in the playoffs at the hotest he has ever been.
Yes, Andyhack, I take Gretzky with not too much thought. I have size and strength on Boston already, which is what Lemieux brings over Gretzky. I have Savard, but Gretzky at his peak makes Savard look average. Plus, adding Gretzky give me the chance to make my top two forward lines as good if not better than any other teams 1st line. If I have a chance at the most productive player in the NHL and the best playoff point producer, it really is a no brainer for me. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2009 : 03:57:32
|
Fair enough Beans. For me it's a "brainer" because as much as you make a good point about Boston already having size, I would value Mario's French Canadian background for the potential (inevitable?) matchup with the Habs.
But here's what I would say to God.
"Give me your GUARANTEE (in writing on one of those stone tablets you made for Moses a few years back) that Mario's peak for the rest of the year is at the level it was in the playoffs of the Penguins Cup years, and then I'll take Mario."
Yes, I would feel that a guarantee would be necessary in Mario's case, not Waynes. This is a big argument in support of Wayne for this question, I know. I'll take flack from those on both sides of this I guess, and thats okay. But if God gives me the guarantee, I would probably go with Mario.
By the way, Kessel is out with mono - that very well could be it for him for a long while. Mono!!!!!!! Fu!!!!! He couldn't have gotten it in one of those many years the Bs were struggling. Had to be this year. So its bye bye Bergeron, bye bye Sturm, maybe bye bye Lucic, and Ference still out. Like God is gonna give me the Mario guarantee! He obviously has a HATE-ON for the Bs. |
Edited by - andyhack on 01/19/2009 03:59:17 |
|
|
|
Guest2002
( )
|
Posted - 01/29/2009 : 10:41:00
|
I've been reading this Gretzky vs. Lemieux stuff and it's very interesting. But I wonder how many of these people making comments ever saw Bobby Orr play. I grew up watching Orr, and also saw Gretzky and Lemieux. Frankly, Orr may have been a better player than both of them!
|
|
|
|
Guest9824
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 09:34:01
|
Mario Lemieux was a great player. The fact that we came back after back spasms, cancer; and still managed to put up huge numbers during the "hooking" era is quite impressive.
Clearly, Lemieux gets the nod in the breakaway department. He was a spectacular one-on-one player, and almost never failed to impress on any given game. The magic that he created with the puck will last in highlight reels, and in our hearts forever - elegant, inspired and dominant. Lemieux was, without a doubt, the 2nd greatest player of all-time.
Let's look at some facts here, and then we can actually begin to debate:
Gretzky has over 1000 points more than Lemieux. One thousand.
Gretzky has 4 200+ point seasons. Lemieux has 0.
Gretzky holds the record for most goals in a season (92).
Gretzky holds the record for most assists in a season (163).
Gretzky has a higher career PPG average than Lemieux.
Okay, you all know that I could keep going, but everyone already knows all of this.
There are four main arguments I hear in favour of Lemieux. All of them are absurd when you look at the facts. I will break these down now:
1. Lemieux played in a different era (more checking, hooking, etc.)
Actually, they played 4 years apart from each other. Are you telling me that 4 years represents an entire ERA of hockey??
By this logic, if we have to diminish Gretzky's records because of "era played", then we would have to do exactly the same thing for Lemieux, as most of those seasons were at the same time.
Let's look at '86-87. Gretzky had 183 points, Lemieux had 107. That's during the same era. The "big bad east"? Give me a break. We're talking about the difference of 76 points. The east might account for 20 points. Maybe 30. Fine, I'm being generous (it is the same league after all). But not 76.
The "different era" argument holds no water. They were essentially in the same league at the same time.
2. Nobody ever hit Gretzky.
The argument is that Dave Semenko "protected" Gretzky, while Lemieux was subject to getting beaten down every game.
This doesn't make sense. We are talking about hockey players here - hardened, determined and vicious young men on skates, who all want to win. Are you telling me that there were NO other players in the entire league that wanted to stand up to Semenko? The enforcers on the other team were so scared of Semenko, that they didn't even try to go after Gretzky? That's ridiculous. Hockey players are hockey players, and they will go after anybody on the other team to win.
The really telling thing about the fact that Gretzky didn't get hit very often, is that we was an expert at avoiding checks. There are legends of putting a "price" on Gretzky's head - which no one ever collected, because no one could ever get to Gretzky. He was such a good skater, always had his head up, and knew where the entire play was before most players could even figure out that Gretzky was on the ice. That is also why Gretzky is the best player of all-time.
And what about the fact that Gretzky was about 15 pounds and 4 inches smaller than Lemieux? If anything, having size should be an advantage in hockey. Why doesn't anyone ever make the point that Gretzky was at a disadvantage because he was smaller?
3. Lemieux was injured more often than Gretzky.
That is unfortunate. But, it's like saying that I could have been a better player than Gretzky - if only I had practiced more.
What could have been, could have been but wasn't. The fact is, we don't know what Lemieux could have done in those injured years. What if he had only scored 75 points? Would we still be debating this point today?
The fact still stands that a.) Gretzky has a higher PPG, and b.) Gretzky has more than 1000 points more than Lemieux. Even if we give Lemieux back 5 seasons during his prime - on a team that included Jaromir Jagr - he wouldn't have caught Gretzky. That should tell us something.
4. Gretzky played on better teams.
The Oilers were the best team of all-time. That's fine. But don't forget that Gretzky played on an ass LA Kings team for the majority of his career.
In '89-90, Gretzky played on a Kings team that featured Luke Robitaille and Bernie Nicholls for half of the season. At the same time, Lemieux played on a Penguins team alongside Paul Coffey, Mark Recchi, John Cullen, Kevin Stevens. Which team is better there? Why is this never mentioned?
Let's jump ahead to '95-96. Gretzky played on a Kings team where the second leading scorer was Dmitri Khristich. At the same time, Lemieux played on the Penguins with (are you ready for this?): Jaromir Jagr, Ron Francis (4th leading scorer of all-time), Petr Nedved (in this prime), Sergei Zubov, and even Markus Naslund.
So, Lemieux definitely had his share of years on a "good" team as well. During that season, Lemieux posted 161 points. During Gretzky's best year, he posted 215. That's a significant swing, and it's hard to ignore such glaringly one-sided statistics.
About "Peak" value vs. "Career" value.
Again, Gretzky all the way. 215 points and 92 goals in one season (different seasons by the way). The best Lemieux did was 199 points and 85 goals.
Career-wise, 2857 career points, 1.92 PPG. Lemieux had 1723 for 1.88PPG. Not even close.
In conclusion, I love Lemieux. He did great things for hockey, for Canada, for all of us growing up. He had passion, he scored important goals, and he was an elegant force for several years during his career.
But, he was the second best player of all-time.
Gretzky was in a league all on his own. He dominated in a way that no other player ever will; and is a hockey legend that will last forever. Statistically, it isn't even close. On the ice, it's clear that Gretzky had more of an impact on the game. The fact that Gretzky's 99 is retired by all professional sports is quite telling. Gretzky is, without a doubt, the greatest hockey player of all-time.
|
|
|
|
Guest9544
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 12:52:54
|
| Lemieux is God and Gretzky is a nobody with no skills whatsoever he never really should have seen NHL ice |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 13:28:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9544
Lemieux is God and Gretzky is a nobody with no skills whatsoever he never really should have seen NHL ice
So...I'm wondering....on your planet, it must be okay for people who are siblings to marry and procreate....hence your birth and subsequent post.
 |
|
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 14:15:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9544
Lemieux is God and Gretzky is a nobody with no skills whatsoever he never really should have seen NHL ice
ok... What do your parents feed you??? Seriously, I've had a lot of argument with a lot of people on here and believe me no one on here likes me, hahaha... But at least everyone I argued or debated with has hockey smarts. You on the other hand have none... How can you say Gretzky is a noone, no skills and that he shouldn't have played in the NHL? that one blows me away... Gretzky is one of the best things that has ever happened to the NHL... The guy in only 1487 NHL games recorded 894 Goals, 1963 Assists and 2857 Points no one has ever came close to any of those... In the playoffs out of 208 games he had 122 goals, 260 assists and 382 points again no one can match that... in 1981-82 he set the record for most goals in a season with 92 I don't think anyone will ever touch that. In 1985-86 he set the record for most assists in a season with 163, thats assists than what great hockey players get in POINTS in a season... Again back in 1981-82 Gretzky had 212 Points,,, noone in the NHL history besides Gretzky has ever reached 200 points in a season and Gretzky has done it 4 times that's amazing... Gretzky has won the Hart Memorial Trophy 9 times, Lady Byng Memorial trophy 5 times, Art Ross trophy 10 times, Lester B. Pearson Trophy 5 times, Conn Smythe 2 times, Won 4 Stanley Cups.. My opinion he was the best player to ever play the game |
|
|
|
MSC
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
601 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 14:34:32
|
| DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS |
|
|
|
Guest9544
( )
|
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 14:58:42
|
| minor hockey dont count |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/10/2009 : 22:03:54
|
I'm a stats guy. I won't deny that. But one thing people have to remember is that statistics, specifically when talking about the greatest players, ever are not what made these players great. It is a symptom of the way they played the game. There is a reason why Bobby Orr has some of the best ever +/- ratings and some defensive scoring records that still stand some 30 years after he retired. It's pretty simple, great players produce great stats.
That being said, I do get a little frustrated when people use that same stats over and over about Gretzky. We all know who's #1 on the 60 odd entries in the NHL Record Book. That's not why he is so great. It's the way he played the game.
BUT, I have to talk about one stat(if you can call it that, it's more of a piece of info). Gretzky is the only player to have more than 2000 points. Again, we all know this. But here is something to think about.
Gretzky reach 1000 points faster than anyone in history. That was Dec. 19,1984 in is 424th game. That's just a shade before his 24th birthday.
That's not the impressive part.
His 2nd 1000 points came just 433 game later, on October 26, 1990. He was 29 at the time.
Although not all of the records Gretzky has today will be his forever, but no one will ever match that again. Ever.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 08:03:34
|
Amen!
Wow, I hadn't ever seen those stats, Beans - 1000 points in 424 games, "2nd" 1000 points in 433 games . . . just, wow. I also didn't realise that he got 2000 points before the age of thirty . . . how that is humanly possible, I don't know.
Andyhack - I'd take Gretz in a second over Lemieux, because at his peak, he's a better scorer, a better assist man, and better team player than the 2nd or 3rd best ever player. Gretzky at his peak is scoring well above Ovechkin pace, dishing out twice as many assists as Malkin or Thornton, and is a team leader (which Lemieux was not, in his prime before the injuries).
Here is where I disagree with Beans, because I put the all-time leading scorer with Savard, a guy I consider more talented assist-wise than Kurri ever was, not to speak of Robitaille, Sandstrom, Granato or Hull, lol.
Does anyone realise that in Gretzky's heyday, when he was an unstoppable goal machine, Kurri's highest assist totals were 64, 63, 61? Savard's last three seasons, he got 69, 74, and 63 assists, with guys like Kovalchuk (52 goals), Murray/Sturm (28/27 goals), Sturm (27 goals). Can you imagine how many goals Gretzky would have gotten with a talented playmaker like Savard?!? Gretzky would break 100 goals, I venture.
Gretzky-Savard-Wheeler
Kessel-Krejci-Lucic
Kobasew-Bergeron-Ryder/Axelsson
In the 27 regular season games remaining, and playoffs, my projection for Gretzky is:
REG SEASON - 35 goals, 42 assists (it takes him a while to get going with his new linemates )
PLAYOFFS - 21 games, Stanley Cup, MVP - 22 goals, 35 assists.
And Andy? You get front row seats for the parade! 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 15:03:20
|
Slozo - if that parade happens one day, my guess is that I'll be standing (as I won't want to miss an inch of it)!
I guess we just have to agree to disagree on whether my earlier question was a "brainer".
But, let's look at it from a slightly different angle. Lets say you got second choice behind someone with the same thinking as you. In other words, that other person jumped on Gretzky quicker than Bill Clinton would jump on an SI cover girl. So you are left with Number 2, and being a guy who prioritizes offense, you take Mario.
Are your superduperstar offensive needs really THAT much worse off with Mario at his peak than with Wayne at his peak?
To me this is like comparing two stunningly beautiful woman. You can't go wrong with either one to serve certain needs of yours in one particular room of the house.
BUT, you may also want to consider the unbelievably attractive woman from Boston who can also perform at very high levels in other rooms of the house (if you know what I mean)!
|
|
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 15:18:06
|
| can't forget Gretzky's 50 goals in only 39 games that too wont ever be matched |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 16:11:02
|
Nice analogy AndyHack, and you are correct. I don't think anyone in their right mind would be disappointed with either Mario or Gretz as a runner up. Specifically in your hypothetical as peak Lemieux with today's Savard would be wicked awesome in Beantown (again, pun intented).
And you're right. It would be like picking between a blonde supermodel or a brunette. Either one would be fine with me!!!! Although that Brunette might perform a little better in other areas of the house, it's the bedroom that counts the most!!! (If ya know what I mean) |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 07:29:14
|
Andhack - If I got the second choice and had to choose Mario . . . weeeeellll, I suppose I'd be pretty happy, lol. Yeah, of course there is not too much between them talent-wise, and you'd still be mapping out the parade route in Beantown while considering the delicious conundrum of who his linemates will be.
And I'll take your SI cover girl analogy further, if you'll allow me:
Unlike most teenagers, I wouldn't jump on the current cover girl. I'd stick with someone who I know performs well, if you catch my drift . . . the all-time leader in SI covers, Elle Macpherson.
No one can deny that Bar Rafaeli has the talent and the stats, but stacked head to head with Elle, there is no denying that Elle's peak value, all time stats (5 covers) and talent are too much for Bar.
Besides, my top room (the bedroom) would have a threesome of Elle MacPherson, Kathy Ireland, and Christie Brinkly . . . don't get me wrong, I'd love to have her in a pinch (or, to pinch); but Bar might be considered one of my fourth room (bathroom) "bangers", and she'd be quite a ways down my list for number one in SI swimsuit girls . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest6177
( )
|
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 16:42:50
|
| I say Mario. Even though Gretzky had more points and everything, mario was a true player. He went through a lot and still finished 2nd all time for career points per game, not far behind Gretzky. Im not saying Gretzky wasnt good im just saying personally i thought mario was better allaround |
|
|
|
Guest9544
( )
|
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 17:59:43
|
| no offense guys but to compare hockey players to cover girls or even women sounds a little gay. it is like saiding if given to chance you would sleep or bathe with Lemieux, gretzky and Savard |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 05:24:16
|
Guest 9544 - if that really is your real name - you're young, aren't you?
Because you remind me how some kids talked, back in the age of the dinasaurs when I was a high schooler myself. And that's fine and all, but really, we'd all appreciate it if you didn't weigh in with the adolescent comments, especially with zingers like this one:
"it is like saiding if given to chance you would sleep or bathe with Lemieux, gretzky and Savard"
ahem. Firstly - it's spelled 'saying', and the grammar is 'if given the chance'. Secondly . . . no, it is not at all like that. In fact, I'd venture a guess that you may be projecting, so I have one solemn request for you, Guest 9544:
Please don't elaborate. This is a family site!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest2828
( )
|
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 07:12:51
|
| Gretzky vs. Lemieux. No disrespect to "Super Mario", but I have to go with "The Great One" on this one. Although Mario was the most purely gifted talent the game has ever seen, Wayne's hockey IQ, god given instincts and ability to avoid injury set him above all. Call it luck or the Semenko factor, but Gretzky manged to elude injuries to a frame half the size of Lemieux's. Unfortunately, due to all the injuries, Mario's career left us wanting more. The would'ves, could'ves and should'ves are endless with Mario, but the fact is he just could not stay healthy for a prolonged period of time to reach his peak. I won't bother touching on Gretz's scoring exploits because they speak for themselves. However, he made Bernie Nichols a 70 goal score and Bob Kudelski a 40 Goal scorer. Whether you love him or hate him, you have to respect him because he always showed up in the clutch. No one was better than Gretzky at his peak. |
|
|
|
Guest9847
( )
|
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 14:48:20
|
| Gretzky was better at his peek and that is why I voted for him but I really think it's amazing how Lemieux played with cancer and that his career was supposed to be done but stuck around for another few years. |
|
|
|
Guest8801
( )
|
Posted - 02/25/2009 : 22:48:19
|
The Gretzky supporters don't really need to justify their support of the Great One - we have 60 records and hundreds of stats to back up our belief that he was the best. It's the Gretzky nay-sayers who are forced to invent scenarios (what if 5 orrs played 5 greatzkys, what if Mario never got cancer, what if what if what if...) that rely on speculation and fantasy rather than cold hard factual statistics. That alone should be a clear indication of his dominance.
But if it isn't enough, I agree with one of the posters above - 3 different times Wayne had more assists than anyone else had points. That means that he could have won 3 scoring titles without ever scoring a goal. No one else has ever destroyed their field of competition on such a vast level. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2009 : 23:19:57
|
Put something into perspective. I heard a little something early this morning. Back in 1982, Gretzky broke the record for goals in a single season. Espo had the record with 76. Gretzky scored his 77th goal on Feb. 23, 1982.
Compare that the two leading goal scorers(Ovechkin with 43 and Parise with 35) had a COMBINED 78 goals on Feb 23, 2009. Gretzky had that by himself. Not to hammer stats down your throat because that is not what made Gretzky so great. But consider how amazing everyone thinks Ovechkin is as a goal scorer. Gretzky burried him, and there is no way you can do the math to say the higher scoring blah blah blah. The scoring in 1982 was not DOUBLE what it is today.
This says nothing about who was better between Lemieux and Gretzky, but I thought it was interesting. |
|
|
|
Bozonator
Top Prospect
57 Posts |
Posted - 02/25/2009 : 23:28:42
|
| I don't remember much of Gretzky and I know he broke every record pretty much. But I wonder how the scoring spread was in the past. I wouldn't know for sure. But it seems to me that a lot more of the scoring is spread out now compared to the elite few that played in the past. I am just assuming, I really don't have enough knowledge to back it up. |
|
|
|
Guest9289
( )
|
Posted - 02/26/2009 : 09:15:05
|
| WE SIMPLY CANNOT COMPARE. is it too difficult too understand? There are way too many factors that lead us to believe we cannot compare the two. For instance, Lemieux's health issues, the 2 players' teamates were different, etc. We simply cannot compare. The only thing we can maybe compare is the talent level, the style of the players, but we cannot compare whose better. Thats not possible to do. Although I am a Lemieux fan and liked gretzky and im old enough to have followed both careers, I truly cannot say who was better because of the unknown factors or different circumstances. All I can say is that whoever is better, it's not by much thats for sure. It is very close between the 2, just like Ovechkin and Crosby today. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Gretzky vs Lemieux 
