| Author |
 Topic  |
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
 Posted - 05/18/2007 : 02:15:05
|
It could be argued that whoever holds the record for worst career +/- wins this debate
It could be argued that whoever holds the worst single season +/- wins this debate
It could be argued that whoever had the worst +/- on the worst team in history wins this debate.
Or it could be Nikolai Borschevsky !  |
 |
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2007 : 06:43:58
|
Worst all-time +/- since 1968, no filtering...
Rnk _ PLAYER __________ GP __ +/- _ ES Dif/G
1 _ STEWART, BOB ______ 575 _ -260 _ -0.452
2 _ LEVER, DON ________ 1020 _ -240 _ -0.235
3 _ CROTEAU, GARY _____ 684 _ -227 _ -0.332
4 _ BABYCH, DAVE ______ 1195 _ -223 _ -0.187
5 _ CHARRON, GUY ______ 734 _ -208 _ -0.283
6 _ HUBER, WILLIE _______ 655 _ -203 _ -0.310
7 _ CIRELLA, JOE ________ 828 _ -201 _ -0.243
8 _ LYNCH, JACK ________ 382 _ -197 _ -0.516
9 _ BOLDIREV, IVAN _____ 1052 _ -190 _ -0.181
10 _ SILLINGER, MIKE _____ 908 _ -181 _ -0.174
11 _ BUCHBERGER, KELLY _ 1182 _ -177 _ -0.150
12 _ DAIGLE, ALEXANDRE __ 616 _ -176 _ -0.286
13 _ PETIT, MICHEL _______ 827 _ -172 _ -0.208
14 _ RAMAGE, ROB ______ 1044 _ -171 _ -0.164
15 _ DeBLOIS, LUCIEN _____ 993 _ -170 _ -0.171
16 _ GILBERTSON, STAN ___ 428 _ -168 _ -0.393
17 _ LIBETT, NICK ________ 982 _ -167 _ -0.170
18 _ JOLY, GREG ________ 365 _ -163 _ -0.447
19 _ NEUFELD, RAY ______ 595 _ -163 _ -0.274
20 _ KEARNS, DENNIS _____ 677 _ -158 _ -0.233
21 _ McBAIN, ANDREW ____ 608 _ -151 _ -0.248
22 _ MIKKELSON, BILL _____ 147 _ -147 _ -1.000
23 _ MULLER, KIRK _______ 1349 _ -146 _ -0.108
24 _ HICKE, ERNIE ________ 520 _ -145 _ -0.279
25 _ PAIEMENT, WILF ______ 946 _ -140 _ -0.148
Is this the Mike Sillinger that never has a chance to unpack his suitcase before he is on the move again...
Lead, follow, or get out of the way... |
Edited by - PuckNuts on 05/18/2007 06:46:20 |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/18/2007 : 08:50:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
Worst all-time +/- since 1968, no filtering...
Rnk _ PLAYER __________ GP __ +/- _ ES Dif/G
1 _ STEWART, BOB ______ 575 _ -260 _ -0.452
2 _ LEVER, DON ________ 1020 _ -240 _ -0.235
3 _ CROTEAU, GARY _____ 684 _ -227 _ -0.332
4 _ BABYCH, DAVE ______ 1195 _ -223 _ -0.187
5 _ CHARRON, GUY ______ 734 _ -208 _ -0.283
6 _ HUBER, WILLIE _______ 655 _ -203 _ -0.310
7 _ CIRELLA, JOE ________ 828 _ -201 _ -0.243
8 _ LYNCH, JACK ________ 382 _ -197 _ -0.516
9 _ BOLDIREV, IVAN _____ 1052 _ -190 _ -0.181
10 _ SILLINGER, MIKE _____ 908 _ -181 _ -0.174
11 _ BUCHBERGER, KELLY _ 1182 _ -177 _ -0.150
12 _ DAIGLE, ALEXANDRE __ 616 _ -176 _ -0.286
13 _ PETIT, MICHEL _______ 827 _ -172 _ -0.208
14 _ RAMAGE, ROB ______ 1044 _ -171 _ -0.164
15 _ DeBLOIS, LUCIEN _____ 993 _ -170 _ -0.171
16 _ GILBERTSON, STAN ___ 428 _ -168 _ -0.393
17 _ LIBETT, NICK ________ 982 _ -167 _ -0.170
18 _ JOLY, GREG ________ 365 _ -163 _ -0.447
19 _ NEUFELD, RAY ______ 595 _ -163 _ -0.274
20 _ KEARNS, DENNIS _____ 677 _ -158 _ -0.233
21 _ McBAIN, ANDREW ____ 608 _ -151 _ -0.248
22 _ MIKKELSON, BILL _____ 147 _ -147 _ -1.000
23 _ MULLER, KIRK _______ 1349 _ -146 _ -0.108
24 _ HICKE, ERNIE ________ 520 _ -145 _ -0.279
25 _ PAIEMENT, WILF ______ 946 _ -140 _ -0.148
Is this the Mike Sillinger that never has a chance to unpack his suitcase before he is on the move again...
Lead, follow, or get out of the way...
Wow, what a list !! A lot of those names bring back memories ! Deblois, Paiement (the OTHER 99 ) Some of those guys make sense because of the teams they were on (Huber, Deblois, Babych, Cirella etc) I am quite surprised about Sillinger but again some of the many teams he was on helped that out. Surprised to see Buchberger there, he was on some decent teams. Ray Neufeld is a bit of a surprise too. But Kirk Muller !?! After looking it up I see that he was a plus only 5 times in 19 seasons. Interesting how the mind works. I remember him as such a strong 2-way player with decent offensive skills that was able to round out his game for the 'Dead Puck Era' but when you look at his stats, his +/- WORSENED in that era, as did his scoring - significantly. Again though - the teams he was on. Boy is THAT a built in excuse.
The only guy I correctly predicted at being on this list - Greg Joly ! The only other big suprise on the list ? Alexandre Daigle managed to play over 600 games ! |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2007 : 14:47:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That is a very interesting way to look at this stat. The differential shows that Gretzky was one of the best, not one of the worst.
And I have put a lot of thought into who I think is the worst defensive player, not only of all time but of the Grezky era. Although there is not one that stuck out in my mind as the absolute worst, one kept on come back to me as a weak defensive player. It happened to be in Gretzky's era as well. Dale Hawerchuk.
The man couldn't even skate backwards!! He was a far worse defensive player than Gretzky. The ESG differential shows him as pretty weak as well.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
Actually Beans it doesn't show him to be one of the best. At a cursory glance maybe you might come to that conclusion. Look a little closer though and something else becomes apparent. No one on that top ten list scored anywhere near Gretzky and yet have close to or better goal differential numbers. Gretzky's goal differential numbers come from his outrageous scoring, not from him being defensively responsible. Look at Trottier for an example. Had he scored at Gretzky's pace he would top this list by a large margin. Had Gretzky scored at Trottiers pace he would be nowhere near the top of this list.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
leafsfan_101
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1530 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 10:47:22
|
Can someone explain to me what ESGA is and how it works??
When life gives you lemons throw them at the Ottawa Senators and their fans and hope it gets them in the eyes ;) |
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 10:59:48
|
ESGA- Even Strength Goals Against. You only get a minus or plus if your on the ice for an even strength goal.
Now, on the topic of Gretzky being the worst defensive player: I highly doubt that he was the worst, and what does it matter if he was? He was the best offensive player of alltime to and any team would have killed to have him play for them. Its almost like anti-crosby debates now, they are so stupid, people dont like the player for whatever reason, then say aload of bulls*** to try and prove there point.
CANUCKS RULE!!!
Get The Towels Out Guys PLAYOFFS!!!
|
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 11:28:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That is a very interesting way to look at this stat. The differential shows that Gretzky was one of the best, not one of the worst.
And I have put a lot of thought into who I think is the worst defensive player, not only of all time but of the Grezky era. Although there is not one that stuck out in my mind as the absolute worst, one kept on come back to me as a weak defensive player. It happened to be in Gretzky's era as well. Dale Hawerchuk.
The man couldn't even skate backwards!! He was a far worse defensive player than Gretzky. The ESG differential shows him as pretty weak as well.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
Actually Beans it doesn't show him to be one of the best. At a cursory glance maybe you might come to that conclusion. Look a little closer though and something else becomes apparent. No one on that top ten list scored anywhere near Gretzky and yet have close to or better goal differential numbers. Gretzky's goal differential numbers come from his outrageous scoring, not from him being defensively responsible. Look at Trottier for an example. Had he scored at Gretzky's pace he would top this list by a large margin. Had Gretzky scored at Trottiers pace he would be nowhere near the top of this list.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
No offense Willus, but you are grasping at straws here. :) The more you look at the stats, the more evidence there is against this entire thread.
1+1=2 
-tc |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 17:52:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That is a very interesting way to look at this stat. The differential shows that Gretzky was one of the best, not one of the worst.
And I have put a lot of thought into who I think is the worst defensive player, not only of all time but of the Grezky era. Although there is not one that stuck out in my mind as the absolute worst, one kept on come back to me as a weak defensive player. It happened to be in Gretzky's era as well. Dale Hawerchuk.
The man couldn't even skate backwards!! He was a far worse defensive player than Gretzky. The ESG differential shows him as pretty weak as well.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
Actually Beans it doesn't show him to be one of the best. At a cursory glance maybe you might come to that conclusion. Look a little closer though and something else becomes apparent. No one on that top ten list scored anywhere near Gretzky and yet have close to or better goal differential numbers. Gretzky's goal differential numbers come from his outrageous scoring, not from him being defensively responsible. Look at Trottier for an example. Had he scored at Gretzky's pace he would top this list by a large margin. Had Gretzky scored at Trottiers pace he would be nowhere near the top of this list.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
No offense Willus, but you are grasping at straws here. :) The more you look at the stats, the more evidence there is against this entire thread.
1+1=2
-tc
So you are disagreeing with my comment above?
What I said makes complete and perfect sense. If you don't think so perhaps you need to attend those logic classes you were talking about, but as a student , not the teacher.
Now instead of people posting on here that they disagree or that "i'm grasping at straws" maybe they could state why it is they disagree, or why the stats don't say what i say they do. How about backing your s%*t up!
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 18:21:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Canucks Man
ESGA- Even Strength Goals Against. You only get a minus or plus if your on the ice for an even strength goal.
Now, on the topic of Gretzky being the worst defensive player: I highly doubt that he was the worst, and what does it matter if he was? He was the best offensive player of alltime to and any team would have killed to have him play for them. Its almost like anti-crosby debates now, they are so stupid, people dont like the player for whatever reason, then say aload of bulls*** to try and prove there point.
CANUCKS RULE!!!
Get The Towels Out Guys PLAYOFFS!!!
Also you can be on the ice when your team scores and not register a point but still receive a +.
Everyone here keeps equating +/- with esga and esgf. They are not the same thing.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 18:56:34
|
As my final post in this thread, I agree that you are grasping at straws a bit here Willus. I can not disagree if you say your opinion is Gretzky is the worst of his era based on what you saw, not the stats. That would be your opinion. However, using the stats and some of the things you have said, the ESG stat does not prove your point. Here are my thoughts:
1) You had said in one post that you can not blame one player on the ice for a goal against, but you can say it's 17% of their responsibility. Well that works in reverse as well. If Gretzy is on the ice, there is an 83% chance it is not him to blame for the goal. Yet, the ESGA against still goes against him.
2) You made a comment that at a cursory glance it appears that ESG statsfavors Gretzky, but in fact they do not. Your comment was that if Trottier had Gretzky's points, his ESG differential would have been significantly higher. That's like saying that if Dean Morton played in 1000 games, he would have had 1000 goals as he played one game and scored a goal in that game. I am not the biggest fan of hypotheticals to begin with, but mixing hypotheticals with stats is really weak in my opinion. I know there is a value to comparing adjusted stats from different eras, but Trottier and Gretzky played in primarily the same era. So why the what ifs?? It was what it was. Just like you said, if Bobby Orr played with Gretzky, he would have had less ESGA. So, by saying that, are you not also saying better defensive players with Gretzky would have helped and therefore saying it is not all him to blame??? Just making sure the logic is right. But that didn't happen. Reality happened, and the ESG stats shows that Gretzky was not the worst in that statsitical catagory.
3) Again, throwing stats completely away and using what I remember from watching Gretzky play, he was not a pylon by any means. He won more than his share of battles against the boards and he won the puck and skated it out of his end on countless occasions. He did his job defensively. Not amazing by any means, but to call him weak I think is not justified.
4) And even if you consider him weak, maybe consider the systems he played under. He was never on a team that had any kind of defensive mind set. They were run and gun. All high scoring. The Oilers of the 80's were some of the highest scoring teams in history, and also had some of the highest goals against. Because his coaches and teams were satisfied with winning games 8-5 does not mean he was a bad defensive player.
So, this is all just restated from what I have said already. So, my final post on this matter. To say Gretzky was weak defensively based on ESGA is not justified. And my eyes told me he wasn't that bad. Definately not the worst out there.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 19:19:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Also you can be on the ice when your team scores and not register a point but still receive a +.
Everyone here keeps equating +/- with esga and esgf. They are not the same thing.
You are right, ESGA/ESGF and +/- are not exactly the same thing, however, they are very very highly correlated. ESGA/ESGA are the highest contributing factors towards the +/- statistic (I believe it's 98%+ if I recall correctly). The only other situations that contribute to the +/- stat are short-handed goals for and against, which are not relatively significant. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 19:25:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
[So you are disagreeing with my comment above?
What I said makes complete and perfect sense. If you don't think so perhaps you need to attend those logic classes you were talking about, but as a student , not the teacher.
Now instead of people posting on here that they disagree or that "i'm grasping at straws" maybe they could state why it is they disagree, or why the stats don't say what i say they do. How about backing your s%*t up!
You are right about one thing here. That is if I dont have the patience and energy to point out the errors in logic and properly debate them, I shouldnt 'partially' comment in the first place. I completely agree - sorry about that and I will try my best to abide by this. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 19:27:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
As my final post in this thread, I agree that you are grasping at straws a bit here Willus. I can not disagree if you say your opinion is Gretzky is the worst of his era based on what you saw, not the stats. That would be your opinion. However, using the stats and some of the things you have said, the ESG stat does not prove your point. Here are my thoughts:
1) You had said in one post that you can not blame one player on the ice for a goal against, but you can say it's 17% of their responsibility. Well that works in reverse as well. If Gretzy is on the ice, there is an 83% chance it is not him to blame for the goal. Yet, the ESGA against still goes against him.
2) You made a comment that at a cursory glance it appears that ESG statsfavors Gretzky, but in fact they do not. Your comment was that if Trottier had Gretzky's points, his ESG differential would have been significantly higher. That's like saying that if Dean Morton played in 1000 games, he would have had 1000 goals as he played one game and scored a goal in that game. I am not the biggest fan of hypotheticals to begin with, but mixing hypotheticals with stats is really weak in my opinion. I know there is a value to comparing adjusted stats from different eras, but Trottier and Gretzky played in primarily the same era. So why the what ifs?? It was what it was. Just like you said, if Bobby Orr played with Gretzky, he would have had less ESGA. So, by saying that, are you not also saying better defensive players with Gretzky would have helped and therefore saying it is not all him to blame??? Just making sure the logic is right. But that didn't happen. Reality happened, and the ESG stats shows that Gretzky was not the worst in that statsitical catagory.
3) Again, throwing stats completely away and using what I remember from watching Gretzky play, he was not a pylon by any means. He won more than his share of battles against the boards and he won the puck and skated it out of his end on countless occasions. He did his job defensively. Not amazing by any means, but to call him weak I think is not justified.
4) And even if you consider him weak, maybe consider the systems he played under. He was never on a team that had any kind of defensive mind set. They were run and gun. All high scoring. The Oilers of the 80's were some of the highest scoring teams in history, and also had some of the highest goals against. Because his coaches and teams were satisfied with winning games 8-5 does not mean he was a bad defensive player.
So, this is all just restated from what I have said already. So, my final post on this matter. To say Gretzky was weak defensively based on ESGA is not justified. And my eyes told me he wasn't that bad. Definately not the worst out there.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
1) The percentage of blame for a GA is constant for everyone. Moot.
2)It isn't like saying Dean Morton would have scored 1000 goals in as many games at all. Trottier proved what he could do over many games. i used him as an example to help make it clear. It wasn't a hypothetical. Simply substituting numbers to make a point.
How can you argue the fact that Gretzky's goal differential doesn't come from his scoring ability. If he were as good defensively as Trottier his goal differential would easily be the best ever. Do the math.
3)My eyes told me he was weak defensively and having watched game seven between the Leafs and King in 93 just recently only confirmed what I knew to be true.
4)Finally the argument i was waiting for someone to come up with. The only one with any kind of merit. And it only applies to the Oilers and Kings. The Rangers weren't all run and gun.
So is this why he tops the all time ESGA list then? Is that what you attribute it to?
I find it telling that when a stat works in Gretzky's favour, his supporters are eager to talk about them but as soon as there is one that sheds a bad light on him it's a worthless, meaningless stat.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Guest7733
( )
|
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 19:29:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
I realized something. Total ESGA is only half the story. You have to do a net total while including total ESGF. Oh wait... that's PLUS/MINUS !!
Hmmm... let's see here, Gretzky's career +/- ....
I also find it quite an eclectic mix of guys at the top of the ESGA list - but a couple of the biggest stars ever, and a high percentage of the best defensemen ever. Look at THEIR annual +/-'s too. I am wondering now about this stat.
tctitans makes a good point about Gretzky scoring in various scenarios - of course he did. If you believe Gretzky was padding his stats then every offensive player did so in the 80's. He was just a more gifted scorer so he has more goals/points, period. "Oh but he scored so many on the power play that it ballooned his total" of course he did : remove one opposition player from the ice and the most dangerous player just got more dangerous ! As far as the scoring thing goes, Lemieux was just the same (just to pick a comparable player from the era). Right near him on the ESGA list, scoring very similar sickening amounts.
Let's table a similar argument about ALL the goalies from the 80's era. GAA below 2.70 was strong, but does that mean all goalies from the 80's were the weekest in all of hockey history. It was the nature of the era.
I love guest 7734 saying that this discussion is boring and that people need a life. Only a complete moron would actually post in a thread that they don't like a thread. Isn't that the equivilent of watching every episode of a tv show that you despise, and then complaining about it ??
I agree with BigShow that this stat is devalued, but I did seriously chew on it for a while though. The presence of so many other quality players suggests so.
Finally, Gretzky wasn't bad defensively. He certainly wasn't the worst of any era, decade, season etc.. He played intelligent positional hockey to make up for his lack of size, and the rest was fantastic reading of the play. I am also not saying that he was a superstar defender either. He was adequate, at least.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 20:41:48
|
OK, call me a liar since I said my last post was the last in this thread, but I have to answer Willus comments.
1) You are right, the point is moot. ESG stats and+/- have little weight to me on the defensive ability of a player.
2) I do understand what you are saying. I can't deny that. What I also can't deny is that what happened is reality. I still don't see the relevance to a better or worst defensive player.
3)Our eyes see different things.
4) He played with the Rangers for what, 3 years??? And his ESGA/game was the best in his career when he was with the Rangers. This proves again that this ESGA stat does nothing to prove that he was a bad defender. What it proves is he was on teams that were not defensive minded and/or weak defensively. It is not a surprise that his worst years of ESGA against were with LA. A very poor defensive team. Think that Larry Robinson, one of the best defensive players in history had two of his worst years with those same Kings.
I'm not trying to say this stat does not work in his favor, as the stat itself proves that he was not the worst. It is you who is talking about what if's of the stat. What all this proves is that ESG stats or +/- has nothing to do with the defensive abilities of a player.
And if you trust sports cliche's, the best defense is a good offense. 1+1=2. Gretzky was amazing offensively. So if the best defense is a good offense, he was amazing.
Willus, that was a joke! All I am saying is he was far from the worst, and far from the best. Average is what I would say.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
Edited by - Beans15 on 05/21/2007 08:09:23 |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:11:50
|
Beans - you are a liar, the Oilers certainly don't rule these days, and you may very well be insane, BUT, I love your kids anyway!
See the Heatly backchecking play which led to Alfie's beautiful pass to Spezza the other night? That's the type of play a guy like Gretzky very rarely, if ever, made. Whether we want to call him average or below average, I don't know, but that very important dimension of hockey was missing from Wayne's game. Is that a criticism? Yes, I guess it is. Is it a significant one? No, not really, cause he played a certain role and obviously did other things so amazingly well that you can forgive that hole in the "Gretzky package". But to say there wasn't a hole, which refering to him as "average" defensively seems to be infering, seems to be a bit misleading to me.
|
Edited by - andyhack on 05/20/2007 21:14:50 |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:24:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Beans - you are a liar, the Oilers certainly don't rule these days, and you may very well be insane, BUT, I love your kids anyway!
See the Heatly backchecking play which led to Alfie's beautiful pass to Spezza the other night? That's the type of play a guy like Gretzky very rarely, if ever, made. Whether we want to call him average or below average, I don't know, but that very important dimension of hockey was missing from Wayne's game. Is that a criticism? Yes, I guess it is. Is it a significant one? No, not really, cause he played a certain role and obviously did other things so amazingly well that you can forgive that hole in the "Gretzky package". But to say there wasn't a hole, which refering to him as "average" defensively seems to be infering, seems to be a bit misleading to me.
Average, below average, horrible, ... are not the topic of this thread. The debated topic is 'worst ever' which surely is not Gretzky. A better topic to debate would have been if he was one of the worst defensive players ever (with over 1000 career points; or with a positive career +/- over 100; or ...).
|
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:37:54
|
quote:
I find it telling that when a stat works in Gretzky's favour, his supporters are eager to talk about them but as soon as there is one that sheds a bad light on him it's a worthless, meaningless stat.
I am certainly not a card carrying member of the "Gretzky camp" (i'm sure it doesnt seem that way lately) and I am not happy about having to keep debating these scenarios on his side, however.
First problem with your statement is that there has been no evidence so far in this thread of any stat that "sheds a bad light on him" with respect to his defensive play. This needs to be proven before you can use this in your future arguements.
If you really believe that these stats prove that Gretzky is a bad defensive player, then you have to use your exact same logic to prove that Bourque and the others were bad defensively as well - unless you can provide further statistical data (facts) on how these stats uniquely apply to Gretzky and none of the others, or provide data on how some of the others are exempt from your logical conclusion. Opinions and hypothetical possibilities don't go very far when you are trying to win a debate as both sides will have their fair share of those.
I'm not saying not to debate the topic to bring out the facts and opinions of all, I'm just saying that don't make conclusions that are not based on facts. People will formulate their opinions and these may even change throughout the debate which is great, but that never changes the facts.
Regardless of my personal opinion on Gretzy's defensive prowness, I must say that there is no evidence that the ESGA stat has any correlation to a players defensive abilities. Again, I'm not saying that this isnt true (I don't think it is - personal opinion), I'm just saying that there is no evidence to support this claim... yet. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2007 : 21:57:56
|
"I must say that there is no evidence that the ESGA stat has any correlation to a players defensive abilities." - tctitans
Agreed.
Well what about Russ Courtnal then ? He seemed pretty week defensively from my recollection. I mentioned Nik Borschevsky. That guy was delicate and tiny. I don't mean to pick on any Leafs. It's just those 2 stand out as a couple of non-checking, non-sacrificing cherry pickers.
I am just spiffballing here but someone else want to throw out a couple suggestions ?? Kent Nillson maybe ? Mats Naslund?? |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 08:15:53
|
Dale Hawerchuk.
The man could not even stake backwards!! Not good defensively at all. And worse that Gretzky in my mind.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 08:43:47
|
TC,
ESGA is not a list anyone wants to lead, correct? Why is that? Because it sheds a bad light on that player.
If Gretzky wasn't poor defensively then why does he lead this category? Why is it him who tops this list? There must be a reason. Or does he just automatically get top billing in every stat category?
And why is it so hard for people to comprehend the differences in how the esga/esgf stats are achieved?
Bourque, Trottier, Clarke, Robinson, Lafleur, Potvin, Park...
All of those guys earned their differential with good to excellent defense combined with good to excellent offense. Gretzky has a similar differential but has offensive numbers over twice that of some of the others. How would it be possible for him to have such a similar differential if he were as good defensively as the others? Messier had a better goal diff every year on Emonton even though Wayne put up much larger offensive numbers. They played very close to the same minutes.
Over time the goal differential per game, per year, per career combined with offensive stats will give a pretty accurate picture of what a player was like defensively.
I honestly don't care whether or not anyone likes or dislikes what the stats say and I'm getting pretty tired of fighting this battle for Chooch to be honest.
It's funny how most hockey pundits through Gretzky's career, these stats and what my eyes saw all point to the same conclusion. Gretzky was weak defensively. Good day.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Guest6743
( )
|
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 10:56:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by BigShow
Keep sippin the haterade Willus3.
Stats can be made to say anything you want them to. I'm curious how the reverse stat looks? I would imagine Gretzky is at the top of that one as well.
As for the worst defensive player of all time, gonna go with Valeri Bure. Decent with the puck, but if he got bumped off, he would just give up and watch.
I'm not a hater BigShow. Why is it that Gretz lovers can never take any critique of him? Every other player is fair game but don't even think about saying a negative word about Gretzky.
Ok BigShow, you tell me how you spin the ESGA stat then?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
I don't think it's so much an issue of Gretzky fans not being able to "take any critique of him", as you say. It's more just trying to defend what people witnessed, as opposed to opinions that are always raised by people who may or may not have seen him play much.
Most of the slams I see against his game are people who watched very selectively (highlights, maybe a Canada Cup game, etc). The people (like myself) who watched him day in and day out know that a lot of the criticism thrown his way is untrue (he was poor defensively, for one).
People who really criticize him are likely to be Lemieux or Orr fans who take issue with him being called the best ever, so their opinions are usually quite biased. I watched all three of those guys, and they were all great players, and all very different in the way they played the game.
But I think if you were starting a franchise, and were asked which guy you would clone (assuming it was possible), it would be Gretzky. |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 11:21:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Dale Hawerchuk.
The man could not even stake backwards!! Not good defensively at all. And worse that Gretzky in my mind.
All right, now we're talking ! What about Bernie Nocholls, a guy who only had a career because of a certain linemate ? Doesn't this thread ask "who is the worst defensive player ever?"
Those are a few suggestions... |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 12:32:35
|
As I recall, Bernie was not very good defensively (either ) but I don't think he beats Pavel Bure for this honor.
More importantly, I think you are not giving Bernie enough credit, 99pickles (are you a pickle fan by the way - new dill or old?).
Sorry, food distraction - but take a look at his pre-Gretzky numbers below:
1983-84 78 41 54 95
1984-85 80 46 54 100
1985-86 80 36 61 97
1986-87 80 33 48 81
1987-88 65 32 46 78
He was no slouch offensively even before Wayne arrived. The fact that he went up to 150 points with Wayne of course had a lot to do with Wayne, but give Bernie some credit for "rising to the occasion" on his own.
Kind of reminds me of when Steffie Graf won everything in sight after Monica Seles was stabbed by that maniac. Some people held it against Graf. But what was she supposed to do - not try to win? Similarly, what was Bernie supposed to do when he was getting more chances due to Gretzky, not try to score?
Pickles - you seem like a good guy and therefore I think you'll agree with me that Nicholls deserves more than being labelled a guy "who only had a career" cause of Gretzky. |
|
|
|
Guest0956
( )
|
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 14:57:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
As I recall, Bernie was not very good defensively (either) but I don't think he beats Pavel Bure for this honor.
More importantly, I think you are not giving Bernie enough credit, 99pickles (are you a pickle fan by the way - new dill or old?).
Sorry, food distraction - but take a look at his pre-Gretzky numbers below:
1983-84 78 41 54 95
1984-85 80 46 54 100
1985-86 80 36 61 97
1986-87 80 33 48 81
1987-88 65 32 46 78
He was no slouch offensively even before Wayne arrived. The fact that he went up to 150 points with Wayne of course had a lot to do with Wayne, but give Bernie some credit for "rising to the occasion" on his own.
Kind of reminds me of when Steffie Graf won everything in sight after Monica Seles was stabbed by that maniac. Some people held it against Graf. But what was she supposed to do - not try to win? Similarly, what was Bernie supposed to do when he was getting more chances due to Gretzky, not try to score?
Pickles - you seem like a good guy and therefore I think you'll agree with me that Nicholls deserves more than being labelled a guy "who only had a career" cause of Gretzky.
I agree with you that Nicholls would have had a pretty good hockey career without Gretzky. He did score 100 points once without him afterall. However, Nicholls scored 70 goals with Gretzky! He went from scoring 32 goals to 70! More than double in one season. That is staggering. And I'd be interested to see how many he scored after Gretzky!
"Similarly, what was Bernie supposed to do when he was getting more chances due to Gretzky, not try to score?"
The funny thing is, this is exactly how I feel when people denounce Gretzky's abilities by saying he was a product of luck, his linemates, and his era, etc, etc. It's almost like he would have been viewed in a better light had he not won scoring titles by January. It's one of those odd cases where the more points he scored, the less people believed in him. If he had had 300 point seasons, I honestly think people would have denounced his abilities just as much, if not more! When a player puts up numbers like that, people don't trust it. Literally, it's unbelievable. And so they have to make up excuses. "He sucks. He's protected. He's lucky. He's a product of his era. He must be doing it with mirrors. He has to be.... He has to be getting away with something. I don't believe the numbers...." It's funny how Gretzky got away with it and lucked out for 10 seasons in a row! Must be the luckiest human being ever to walk the Earth.
Anyway, excuse the rant.
|
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2007 : 18:36:13
|
More with the Bernie tangent (sorry admin guys).
Here are Bernie's post Gretzky numbers - they too show that he could produce fairly decently offensively. Also, according to what I just read, he also became better defensively in his latter years.
1989-90 32 12 25 37
1990-91 71 25 48 73
1991-92 1 0 0 0
1991-92 49 20 29 49
1992-93 46 8 32 40
1992-93 23 5 15 20
1993-94 61 19 27 46
1994-95 48 22 29 51
1995-96 59 19 41 60
1996-97 65 12 33 45
1997-98 60 6 22 28
1998-99 10 0 2 2
I suppose one could argue too that Gretzky screwed up Bernie's career a bit. Now he is known as "the guy that Gretzky made into a 70 goal scorer". Had he never played with Gretzky and continued his very solid pre-Gretzky pace, he would have been far more respected in the end.
How's that for a non-Gretzky camp member (I carry my card by the way) finding new and innovative ways to find fault in the Legend of the Great One!
Anyway, I think I'll start a "Lets respect Bernie Nicholls a little more" Club. Maybe Wayne would sponsor me. They were good buddies as I remember. Maybe he feels guilty for ruining the guy's reputation.
Gretzky Guys!!!!! Relax!!!!! I'm kidding.
sort of
|
|
|
|
Guest5294
( )
|
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 16:51:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
More with the Bernie tangent (sorry admin guys).
Here are Bernie's post Gretzky numbers - they too show that he could produce fairly decently offensively. Also, according to what I just read, he also became better defensively in his latter years.
1989-90 32 12 25 37
1990-91 71 25 48 73
1991-92 1 0 0 0
1991-92 49 20 29 49
1992-93 46 8 32 40
1992-93 23 5 15 20
1993-94 61 19 27 46
1994-95 48 22 29 51
1995-96 59 19 41 60
1996-97 65 12 33 45
1997-98 60 6 22 28
1998-99 10 0 2 2
I suppose one could argue too that Gretzky screwed up Bernie's career a bit. Now he is known as "the guy that Gretzky made into a 70 goal scorer". Had he never played with Gretzky and continued his very solid pre-Gretzky pace, he would have been far more respected in the end.
How's that for a non-Gretzky camp member (I carry my card by the way) finding new and innovative ways to find fault in the Legend of the Great One!
Anyway, I think I'll start a "Lets respect Bernie Nicholls a little more" Club. Maybe Wayne would sponsor me. They were good buddies as I remember. Maybe he feels guilty for ruining the guy's reputation.
Gretzky Guys!!!!! Relax!!!!! I'm kidding.
sort of
Considering that Nichols didnt even play on Gretzkys line; they were centers. You 99ers! |
|
|
|
Guest5294
( )
|
Posted - 05/22/2007 : 16:52:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
. He won more than his share of battles against the boards and he won the puck and skated it out of his end on countless occasions.
Thats the funniest line I ever read. Thanks for the laughs.
You never saw him play did you. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 07:12:15
|
Just a thought/question. Had it been Bernie Nicholls who topped the list for career ESGA would you all still balk at it? This is a rhetorical question as I know that no one would answer honestly anyway.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 09:36:08
|
Just for perusal. Lots of guys in here playing in the same era as Gretz by the way.
Worst GPG By Forwards (min. 200 gp)
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
Wilf Paiement 946 957 1.01
Miroslav Frycer 415 416 1.00
Dennis Hextall 684 682 1.00
Phil Esposito 1047 1040 0.99
Rick Martin 685 676 0.99
Nelson Pyatt 296 292 0.99
Guy Charron 734 715 0.97
Dennis Maruk 888 865 0.97
Kent Nilsson 553 538 0.97
Merlin Malinowski 282 274 0.97
Bernie Nicholls 1127 1094 0.97
Gilbert Perreault 1191 1154 0.97
Ivan Boldirev 1052 1015 0.96
Rick Vaive 876 844 0.96
Pierre Larouche 812 779 0.96
Here are some notable players:
Alyn McCauley 320 110 0.34 x
Kris Draper 657 236 0.36 x
John Madden 320 117 0.37 x
Jere Lehtinen 510 224 0.44 x
Doug Jarvis 964 446 0.46 x
Bobby Holik 942 472 0.50 x
Michael Peca 546 289 0.53 x
Craig Ramsay 1070 567 0.53 x
Guy Carbonneau 1318 712 0.54 x
Bobby Clarke 1144 629 0.55 x
Bob Gainey 1160 648 0.56 x
Clark Gillies 958 561 0.59 x
Steve Shutt 930 560 0.60 x
Yvan Cournoyer 774 475 0.61 x
Sergei Fedorov 908 564 0.62 x
Bill Barber 903 561 0.62 x
Markus Naslund 712 451 0.63 x
Jacques Lemaire 853 556 0.65 x
Jeremy Roenick 1062 702 0.66 x
Esa Tikkanen 877 590 0.67 x
Dave Andreychuk 1515 1038 0.69 x
Peter Bondra 907 635 0.70 x
Mike Modano 1025 721 0.70 x
Brendan Shanahan 1186 836 0.70 x
Stan Mikita 845 596 0.71 x
Bryan Trottier 1279 920 0.72 x
Theoren Fleury 1084 784 0.72 x
Pat Verbeek 1424 1049 0.74 x
Mike Bossy 752 556 0.74 x
Guy Lafleur 1126 834 0.74 x
Trevor Linden 1079 806 0.75 x
Steve Larmer 1006 752 0.75 x
Doug Gilmour 1474 1125 0.76 x
Dave Keon 824 631 0.77 x
Vincent Damphousse 1296 1021 0.79 x
Eric Lindros 639 506 0.79 x
Alexander Mogilny 919 733 0.80 x
Tim Kerr 655 524 0.80 x
Rod Brind'Amour 1031 830 0.81 x
Cam Neely 726 585 0.81 x
Denis Savard 1196 982 0.82 x
Glenn Anderson 1129 930 0.82 x
Luc Robitaille 1286 1080 0.84 x
Mats Sundin 1005 848 0.84 x
Michel Goulet 1089 925 0.85 x
Brett Hull 1183 1014 0.86 x
Teemu Selanne 801 688 0.86 x
Mark Recchi 1091 941 0.86 x
Mike Gartner 1432 1236 0.86 x
Mark Messier 1680 1455 0.87 x
Alexei Yashin 663 576 0.87 x
Ron Francis 1651 1454 0.88 x
Dino Ciccarelli 1232 1091 0.89 x
Jaromir Jagr 950 851 0.90 x
Pavel Bure 702 630 0.90 x
Jari Kurri 1251 1126 0.90 x
Adam Oates 1277 1170 0.92 x
Steve Yzerman 1378 1265 0.92 x
Joe Sakic 1074 996 0.93 x
Darryl Sittler 1096 1025 0.94 x
Pat LaFontaine 865 810 0.94 x
Gilbert Perreault 1191 1154 0.97 x
Bernie Nicholls 1127 1094 0.97 x
Phil Esposito 1047 1040 0.99 x
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01 x
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01 x
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02 x
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07 x
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22 x
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24 x
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 09:38:01
|
Willus, in all honesty, I would still balk at it. ESGA and +/- has far too much room for misinterpretations. A player on a bad team for a number of years will more than likely have a very poor ranking in this stat. This is more based on team than it is individual, so it really doesn't matter what player would top the list. Just like Bourque being on the top 5 worst. We have almost all agreed that Bourque was a fine defensive player. So, how could his stat hold water in gauging a player's defensive ability?
And I notice Chooch has re-appeared to through in his ignorant two cents. I'm glad I could make you laugh. Be certain that everything you say makes me roll on the floor in laughter as well.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 10:26:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Willus, in all honesty, I would still balk at it. ESGA and +/- has far too much room for misinterpretations. A player on a bad team for a number of years will more than likely have a very poor ranking in this stat. This is more based on team than it is individual, so it really doesn't matter what player would top the list. Just like Bourque being on the top 5 worst. We have almost all agreed that Bourque was a fine defensive player. So, how could his stat hold water in gauging a player's defensive ability?
And I notice Chooch has re-appeared to through in his ignorant two cents. I'm glad I could make you laugh. Be certain that everything you say makes me roll on the floor in laughter as well.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
I believe you Beans.
Can you tell me though, why the difference in Messier's and Gretzky's esga per game while they were on the oilers with relatively equal ice time? I understand that Gretzky put up larger offensive numbers, but that's not what we're discussing here. Did I post Messiers numbers? Maybe I didn't. I can if you like.
Now as for Bourque being on there. Take a look at the number of games played and also the ice time logged. Both significantly larger numbers than Gretzky. Per game Bourque is .90, Gretzky is 1.24 in the same era. Again, a significant difference.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
Edited by - willus3 on 05/24/2007 10:35:02 |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 11:40:52
|
Look at some of these names we are talking about here:
Name GP ESGA Per Game
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07
Mike Rogers 484 504 1.04
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01
Phil Esposito 1047 1040 0.99
Rick Martin 685 676 0.99
Dennis Maruk 888 865 0.97
Kent Nilsson 553 538 0.97
Bernie Nicholls 1127 1094 0.97
Gilbert Perreault 1191 1154 0.97
Rick Vaive 876 844 0.96
Pierre Larouche 812 779 0.96
All were very talented offensive players (some of the best ever!) and got tons of ice time. There must be another correlation here than just saying that they are sucked defensively. Perhaps since they were the leaders of their teams offensively, they were coached to take more chances? cheat a bit? I don't really know, and I don't have the answer. It does seem very strange to me to look at this list by itself and come to any specific conclusions. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 12:47:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
Look at some of these names we are talking about here:
Name GP ESGA Per Game
Wayne Gretzky 1487 1838 1.24
Mario Lemieux 879 1072 1.22
Peter Stastny 977 1041 1.07
Mike Rogers 484 504 1.04
Bernie Federko 1000 1019 1.02
Marcel Dionne 1348 1368 1.01
Dale Hawerchuk 1188 1202 1.01
Phil Esposito 1047 1040 0.99
Rick Martin 685 676 0.99
Dennis Maruk 888 865 0.97
Kent Nilsson 553 538 0.97
Bernie Nicholls 1127 1094 0.97
Gilbert Perreault 1191 1154 0.97
Rick Vaive 876 844 0.96
Pierre Larouche 812 779 0.96
All were very talented offensive players (some of the best ever!) and got tons of ice time. There must be another correlation here than just saying that they are sucked defensively. Perhaps since they were the leaders of their teams offensively, they were coached to take more chances? cheat a bit? I don't really know, and I don't have the answer. It does seem very strange to me to look at this list by itself and come to any specific conclusions.
I know what you're saying TC and by no means am I just basing my opinions on these stats. But to me they reinforce my thought that he was weak defensively. Why must there be another correlation? Cheating a bit for instance is cherry picking, which is playing weak defensively. Look at the difference too between Wayne, Mario and everyone else. It's a significant gap to Peter Stastny. So it's not like the stats are even close. If they were then I think it would be a different argument for sure.
I'm not in any way trying to be rude or derogatory. I'm just pointing out what I saw and what I think these stats support.
I think many just don't want to admit it for some reason. It's as if it will diminish him in some way.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 13:35:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I know what you're saying TC and by no means am I just basing my opinions on these stats. But to me they reinforce my thought that he was weak defensively. Why must there be another correlation? Cheating a bit for instance is cherry picking, which is playing weak defensively. Look at the difference too between Wayne, Mario and everyone else. It's a significant gap to Peter Stastny. So it's not like the stats are even close. If they were then I think it would be a different argument for sure.
I'm not in any way trying to be rude or derogatory. I'm just pointing out what I saw and what I think these stats support.
I think many just don't want to admit it for some reason. It's as if it will diminish him in some way.
I thought that we already all agreed that Gretzky's defensive play left a lot to be desired (based on numerous other things - excluding these stats)? He may have not have had sub-par defensive abilities (that's a different debate ;)), but his game was entirely focused on offense and the defensive part of his game did suffer severely because of this.
The debate we are having now (at least what I thought) was if he was the worst defensive player ever (which I don't believe for 1 minute) and how him leading the ESGA list correlates into being the worst defensive player ever (which I really don't see a strong correlation here myself but I do agree that it's obviously not a positive, and it's not necessarily a list that anyone wants to be on).
That's it! :) |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 14:01:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
I thought that we already all agreed that Gretzky's defensive play left a lot to be desired (based on numerous other things - excluding these stats)? He may have not have had sub-par defensive abilities (that's a different debate ;)), but his game was entirely focused on offense and the defensive part of his game did suffer severely because of this.
The debate we are having now (at least what I thought) was if he was the worst defensive player ever (which I don't believe for 1 minute) and how him leading the ESGA list correlates into being the worst defensive player ever (which I really don't see a strong correlation here myself but I do agree that it's obviously not a positive, and it's not necessarily a list that anyone wants to be on).
That's it! :)
Ok, sorry, I know you want to drop it, but...
If because he was so focused on offense that the defensive part of his game "suffered severely" I would take that to mean "sub-par". Suffered moderately maybe not sub-par. Suffered severely has to be sub-par.
I'm probably just finding fault with your phrasing though.
Again, I'm not saying he was the worst ever, but I think a case can be made for worst of his era.
Out of curiosity who do you say is the worst of Gretzky's generation and worst ever?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 14:29:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Ok, sorry, I know you want to drop it, but...
If because he was so focused on offense that the defensive part of his game "suffered severely" I would take that to mean "sub-par". Suffered moderately maybe not sub-par. Suffered severely has to be sub-par. I'm probably just finding fault with your phrasing though.
Nope. I agree. Sub-par.
quote:
Again, I'm not saying he was the worst ever, but I think a case can be made for worst of his era.
I still don't agree with this. :)
quote:
Out of curiosity who do you say is the worst of Gretzky's generation and worst ever?
My view here is that the worst of Gretzky's generation (or ever) were probably some nonames that we don't remember since they were horrible defensive players and their offensive abilities never developped as expected to counteract this so they didnt have long careers. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 14:34:14
|
How about worst of his era who played over 1000 games then?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 15:25:42
|
Willus, to answer your question about Messier.Yes, Messier had less ESGA than Gretzky with the Oilers. However, all that tells me is that they didn't play together much. Messier's role until Gretzky left was to be an offensive threat on an energy/grinding line. Gretzky's role was to flat out put points on the baord. IF Messier had played with Gretzky, his numbers would have been different as would have Gretzky's. You did post Messier's numbers (0.87/game) and Gretzky's (1.24). The difference is one ESGA every two games. Does that make it a huge sway?? Really?? Over a career it does. But in the midst of a game or playoff series, could you say that Gretzky's ESGA stat was a negative impact to his team??
I just don't see how this stat proves anything towards a player's defensive ability. Like I had said previously, if you were to put up a poll asking who was a better defensive player between Gretzky and Lemieux, Mario would win by a landslide. However, statistically, they were virtually the same on ESGA. Same thing for Glen Anderson. He had a lower ESGA/game than Messier did. I would never agree that Anderson was a better defensive player than Messier, but this ESGA stat shows otherwise. This ESGA doesn't prove a thing in my books.
And, to throw in my two cents, I agree fully with tctitans. Gretzky's job was never to play defensively. But that also proves nothing towards his defensive ability. He did the job defensively he was asked to do. He was responsible defensively. Not a stand out, but not a slouch. Again. not the worst of his era or any other era.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 16:15:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Willus, to answer your question about Messier.Yes, Messier had less ESGA than Gretzky with the Oilers. However, all that tells me is that they didn't play together much. Messier's role until Gretzky left was to be an offensive threat on an energy/grinding line. Gretzky's role was to flat out put points on the baord. IF Messier had played with Gretzky, his numbers would have been different as would have Gretzky's. You did post Messier's numbers (0.87/game) and Gretzky's (1.24). The difference is one ESGA every two games. Does that make it a huge sway?? Really?? Over a career it does. But in the midst of a game or playoff series, could you say that Gretzky's ESGA stat was a negative impact to his team??
I just don't see how this stat proves anything towards a player's defensive ability. Like I had said previously, if you were to put up a poll asking who was a better defensive player between Gretzky and Lemieux, Mario would win by a landslide. However, statistically, they were virtually the same on ESGA. Same thing for Glen Anderson. He had a lower ESGA/game than Messier did. I would never agree that Anderson was a better defensive player than Messier, but this ESGA stat shows otherwise. This ESGA doesn't prove a thing in my books.
And, to throw in my two cents, I agree fully with tctitans. Gretzky's job was never to play defensively. But that also proves nothing towards his defensive ability. He did the job defensively he was asked to do. He was responsible defensively. Not a stand out, but not a slouch. Again. not the worst of his era or any other era.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane??
I'm not referring to his defensive abilities. I'm referring to the effort he put into being any part of defense. There were many many players whose sole job it was to score but they still put the effort in to play some defense. Michel Goulet for instance. Or Gilbert Perreault. Even Mike Bossy.
And yes the difference between Messier and Gretzky's numbers is very significant. 1 goal every two games is huge. In terms of a playoff series it could mean the series. It only takes one goal.
And while tc doesn't say he's the worst, he did say he was sub-par defensively. I'd say sub-par = slouch.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Who was the worst defensive player ever 
