| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
 Posted - 05/24/2007 : 19:30:14
|
Note that some 99ers on this site (and since I am Ogopogo, on HF Boards also) acknowledge that gretzky was only a role player - "His role was to put up points etc" that we keep hearing.
On that basis, which is correct and I agree, should he even be a top players of all time list?
I mean, would you award a DH in baseball an MVP trophy? NO!
Why did a role player like 99 win top honours on the Hockey News Top 100 poll? Maybe becasue the voters were overwhelmingly guys from Ontario? Maybe the same sucjkers who gave him Hart Trophies? Maybe because it sells Hockey News in Onatrio, its largest market?
Probably all those reasons.
Anyway, Mario is the Greatest ever and 99 shouldnt even be near the top of the list if he was a role player..
I am Ogopogo's bodyguard
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 20:02:03
|
 |
 |
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 20:02:06
|
| give it up Chooch. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 20:26:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by chooch
Note that some 99ers on this site (and since I am Ogopogo, on HF Boards also) acknowledge that gretzky was only a role player - "His role was to put up points etc" that we keep hearing.
On that basis, which is correct and I agree, should he even be a top players of all time list?
I mean, would you award a DH in baseball an MVP trophy? NO!
Why did a role player like 99 win top honours on the Hockey News Top 100 poll? Maybe becasue the voters were overwhelmingly guys from Ontario? Maybe the same sucjkers who gave him Hart Trophies? Maybe because it sells Hockey News in Onatrio, its largest market?
Probably all those reasons.
Anyway, Mario is the Greatest ever and 99 shouldnt even be near the top of the list if he was a role player..
Mario was a roll player too, so I guess he's out according to you too. |
|
|
|
Canucks Man
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1547 Posts |
Posted - 05/24/2007 : 23:22:40
|
He won harts because he was the MVP of his team and carried them and made all the players around him much better. I agree with TC you really need to give it up, your agruments are becoming weaker and weaker.
CANUCKS RULE!!!
Get The Towels Out Guys PLAYOFFS!!!
|
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 06:22:29
|
Ogopogo is my hero Chooch but it wouldn't surprise me if he needs a bodyguard.
Your train of thought here touches on why I don't believe he is the greatest of all time though. I just don't understand how a one dimensional player can be considered the best when there were others who were extremely good at everything.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 10:59:37
|
It is clearly the opinion of few that he is one dimensional. He was outstanding offensively, but he was far from weak in other areas of the game. I just don't see how the majority of "hockey people" have him either 1 or 2, yet Mr. Chooch's opinion has to be the right one. Everyone else is wrong. Ya, that makes sense!
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 05/25/2007 : 11:08:53
|
Comparing a hockey player to a DH in baseball is rediculous. If Gretzky went out for penalty shots only then your comparison might make sense but obviously it is lame at best. Gretzky played well over 20 minutes a game and therefore contributed in many other areas - both good and bad.
Chooch is there any other topic than Gretzky you'd like to talk about? I'd love to hear some of your insight into other discussion topics. |
Edited by - leigh on 05/25/2007 11:40:39 |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 04:05:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
It is clearly the opinion of few that he is one dimensional.
You mean to tell me that someone somewhere is saying that Wayne Gretzky was one-dimensional ?? Now I've heard it all. I remember when all the arguments I have ever heard were about who was better, or the best, of all time. But to say that any one of Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe,Orr, Richard, Yzerman, Beliveau, etc etc was one dimensional is simply laughable. Give your head a shake. Every one of them was otherworldly, so the argument is really just splitting hairs. Even if you are wholeheartedly in favour of one of them, you cannot deny the brilliance of the others. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 08:41:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
It is clearly the opinion of few that he is one dimensional.
You mean to tell me that someone somewhere is saying that Wayne Gretzky was one-dimensional ?? Now I've heard it all. I remember when all the arguments I have ever heard were about who was better, or the best, of all time. But to say that any one of Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe,Orr, Richard, Yzerman, Beliveau, etc etc was one dimensional is simply laughable. Give your head a shake. Every one of them was otherworldly, so the argument is really just splitting hairs. Even if you are wholeheartedly in favour of one of them, you cannot deny the brilliance of the others.
Gretzky wasn't one dimensional? Perhaps you could enlighten us then and tell who was?
Saying a player is one dimensional is not denying their brilliance.
Yzerman for instance was a completely one dimensional player early in his career. The last half of his career he was an incredible two way player. No longer one dimensional but still every bit as brilliant, if not more so.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 08:51:00
|
My opinion is that Gretzky was a decent player in most aspects of the game. The only area where he was weak was in physical play. It's because he was so amazing offensively that the other areas of his game was overshadowed. Just because he was the most productive offensive player of all time does not mean he was poor everywhere else.
I Love your Kids, IHC is the man, and The Oilers Rule. Does that make me insane?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 09:16:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
My opinion is that Gretzky was a decent player in most aspects of the game. The only area where he was weak was in physical play. It's because he was so amazing offensively that the other areas of his game was overshadowed. Just because he was the most productive offensive player of all time does not mean he was poor everywhere else.
There was no 'rest of his game'.
Why do the Gretzky guys insist that others didn't know how to watch him? This always makes me laugh.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 11:25:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
My opinion is that Gretzky was a decent player in most aspects of the game. The only area where he was weak was in physical play. It's because he was so amazing offensively that the other areas of his game was overshadowed. Just because he was the most productive offensive player of all time does not mean he was poor everywhere else.
There was no 'rest of his game'.
Why do the Gretzky guys insist that others didn't know how to watch him? This always makes me laugh.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Other than posters on forums, I cannot think of - or imagine for that matter- ANY knowledgeable hockey person that would ever say that there was NO other part to Gretzky's game. C'mon willus,you are very knowledgeable - you know that all of the greatest players had at least several redeeming factors to their game. Some had glaring weeknesses. But the great players that had glaring weeknesses aren't the greatest of all time. They are Tier 2 superstars. Not Gretzkys, Lemieuxs, Orrs, Howes... Those guys IMHO were outstanding in many categories, if not almost all, and that's why they are the same "Best of" names that come up time and again. N'est pas ?? |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 16:17:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
My opinion is that Gretzky was a decent player in most aspects of the game. The only area where he was weak was in physical play. It's because he was so amazing offensively that the other areas of his game was overshadowed. Just because he was the most productive offensive player of all time does not mean he was poor everywhere else.
There was no 'rest of his game'.
Why do the Gretzky guys insist that others didn't know how to watch him? This always makes me laugh.
"You are not your desktop wallpaper"
Other than posters on forums, I cannot think of - or imagine for that matter- ANY knowledgeable hockey person that would ever say that there was NO other part to Gretzky's game. C'mon willus,you are very knowledgeable - you know that all of the greatest players had at least several redeeming factors to their game. Some had glaring weeknesses. But the great players that had glaring weeknesses aren't the greatest of all time. They are Tier 2 superstars. Not Gretzkys, Lemieuxs, Orrs, Howes... Those guys IMHO were outstanding in many categories, if not almost all, and that's why they are the same "Best of" names that come up time and again. N'est pas ??
Can you tell me which categories you consider Gretzky to be outstanding in please?
"You are not your desktop wallpaper" |
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 16:53:52
|
Wouldn't it be easier for me to list the one he wasn't outstanding in ?? He wasn't a very good body-checker, and he didn't fight much. So I suppose you could sum that up as him not being the most physical player. But guess what, then niether was Lemieux. Even though he had size on Gretz, I believe they have they same number of career fights (one). And Lemieux didn't throw any more hits then Gretzky did. Both were too busy avoiding hits - although Gretzky didn't have much choice there.
And so you mean to tell me that he wasn't outstanding in any categories?? So he shouldn't have been in the NHL then ? |
|
|
|
Guest5585
( )
|
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 17:52:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
Wouldn't it be easier for me to list the one he wasn't outstanding in ?? He wasn't a very good body-checker, and he didn't fight much. So I suppose you could sum that up as him not being the most physical player. But guess what, then niether was Lemieux. Even though he had size on Gretz, I believe they have they same number of career fights (one). And Lemieux didn't throw any more hits then Gretzky did. Both were too busy avoiding hits - although Gretzky didn't have much choice there.
And so you mean to tell me that he wasn't outstanding in any categories?? So he shouldn't have been in the NHL then ?
Utter nonesne.
Gretzky nevr carried the puck; he never scored ened to end goals like Lafleur, Mario, Orr, Perreault, Morenz etc.
He needed space on the ice. He couldnt create the space himself like those players.
Why dont you watch some of his "great" games. |
|
|
|
Guest4090
( )
|
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 18:21:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5585
Gretzky nevr carried the puck; he never scored ened to end goals like Lafleur, Mario, Orr, Perreault, Morenz etc.
He needed space on the ice. He couldnt create the space himself like those players.
Why dont you watch some of his "great" games.
You are so stupid. Gretzky was one of the best puck carriers of all time and he made more space for him and other players than any other player in history. He was a magician at knowing and understanding the game - he would beat a player in the neutral zone, carry it in over the blueline then do his famous circle-back and watch how the play develops. He may circle back 2 or 3 more times depending on what he saw and drew players to him... then at the perfect time he'd find someone wide open going for the net for an easy put-in.
|
|
|
|
PuckNuts
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2414 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2007 : 18:22:06
|
Other "role player" MVP's...
Theodore 2002
Hasek 1997,1998
Lindros 1995
Hull 1991...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
|
|
|
99pickles
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
671 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2007 : 00:57:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5585
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
Wouldn't it be easier for me to list the one he wasn't outstanding in ?? He wasn't a very good body-checker, and he didn't fight much. So I suppose you could sum that up as him not being the most physical player. But guess what, then niether was Lemieux. Even though he had size on Gretz, I believe they have they same number of career fights (one). And Lemieux didn't throw any more hits then Gretzky did. Both were too busy avoiding hits - although Gretzky didn't have much choice there.
And so you mean to tell me that he wasn't outstanding in any categories?? So he shouldn't have been in the NHL then ?
Utter nonesne.
Gretzky nevr carried the puck; he never scored ened to end goals like Lafleur, Mario, Orr, Perreault, Morenz etc.
He needed space on the ice. He couldnt create the space himself like those players.
Why dont you watch some of his "great" games.
You hide behind "guest" because you are an unintelligent kid who never saw Gretzky play. It also allows you to make idiotic statements for the sheer joy of it. When everyone just rolls their eyes at your posts after growing tired of your antics, you come back as a new guest. When you have something intelligent to say, then say it. I wouldn't even have an opinion on this if I didn't spend the entire 80's watching and playing hockey, or spend the last decade working in,writing about, reading about, researching on, archiving in, etc... Hockey.
Please don't say infantile things such as "go watch some of his games". I have video tape and reel-to-reel at home that is twice your age, And it all has hockey on it ! |
|
|
|
chooch
Top Prospect
Afghanistan
60 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2007 : 13:30:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5585
quote:
Originally posted by 99pickles
Wouldn't it be easier for me to list the one he wasn't outstanding in ?? He wasn't a very good body-checker, and he didn't fight much. So I suppose you could sum that up as him not being the most physical player. But guess what, then niether was Lemieux. Even though he had size on Gretz, I believe they have they same number of career fights (one). And Lemieux didn't throw any more hits then Gretzky did. Both were too busy avoiding hits - although Gretzky didn't have much choice there.
And so you mean to tell me that he wasn't outstanding in any categories?? So he shouldn't have been in the NHL then ?
Utter nonesne.
Gretzky nevr carried the puck; he never scored ened to end goals like Lafleur, Mario, Orr, Perreault, Morenz etc.
He needed space on the ice. He couldnt create the space himself like those players.
Why dont you watch some of his "great" games.
You hide behind "guest" because you are an unintelligent kid who never saw Gretzky play. It also allows you to make idiotic statements for the sheer joy of it. When everyone just rolls their eyes at your posts after growing tired of your antics, you come back as a new guest. When you have something intelligent to say, then say it. I wouldn't even have an opinion on this if I didn't spend the entire 80's watching and playing hockey, or spend the last decade working in,writing about, reading about, researching on, archiving in, etc... Hockey.
Please don't say infantile things such as "go watch some of his games". I have video tape and reel-to-reel at home that is twice your age, And it all has hockey on it !
Put your muchchas where your mouth is.
What do you got from the 70's? Any special reel to reel games? any finals like 71?
I am Ogopogo's bodyguard |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Should a role player be the "Greatest Ever"? 
