| Author |
 Topic  |
|
shazariahl
Top Prospect
50 Posts |
 Posted - 04/06/2009 : 08:51:05
|
Most these posts seem to be a couple years old. I'm wondering if now, after basically 4 seasons of Crosby's career, does anyone really think he's even close to Gretzky's level? By this time Gretzky was really hitting his stride - he's put up 50 in 39 and 92 goals in a season, broken the 200 point mark for the first time in hockey history, and was following up that season with another 196 points. From here he'd go on to break 200 points 3 straight times.
On the other hand, Crosby, who looked fairly comparable at the start of his career when Wayne's numbers were adjusted for scoring, doesn't look even REMOTELY close to Wayne's level now, only two years later. Where Wayne was breaking 200 points and winning scoring races by an unprecedented 70 points, Crosby's 3rd in league scoring. He won't win the Art Ross or the Hart, both of which Wayne would go on to own for an entire decade.
Crosby certainly looked comparable in his first two seasons, but he seems to have fallen DRASTICALLY off the pace now. The only true positive I can say for Crosby is that he did manage to help take his team to a cup finals, which is impressive for such a young captain. Also, he was injured much of last year. But so far he's looked more fragile than Wayne, and isn't putting up anywhere near the points.
|
 |
|
|
Guest0436
( )
|
Posted - 04/16/2009 : 17:43:53
|
quote:
Anyone who would say Crosby never watched Gretzky play.
You are DEAD WRONG!
I watch Crosby all the time as oppossed to rarity I watched (ugh) Gretsky. |
|
|
|
fly4apuckguy
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
834 Posts |
Posted - 04/26/2009 : 22:05:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by shazariahl
Most these posts seem to be a couple years old. I'm wondering if now, after basically 4 seasons of Crosby's career, does anyone really think he's even close to Gretzky's level? By this time Gretzky was really hitting his stride - he's put up 50 in 39 and 92 goals in a season, broken the 200 point mark for the first time in hockey history, and was following up that season with another 196 points. From here he'd go on to break 200 points 3 straight times.
On the other hand, Crosby, who looked fairly comparable at the start of his career when Wayne's numbers were adjusted for scoring, doesn't look even REMOTELY close to Wayne's level now, only two years later. Where Wayne was breaking 200 points and winning scoring races by an unprecedented 70 points, Crosby's 3rd in league scoring. He won't win the Art Ross or the Hart, both of which Wayne would go on to own for an entire decade.
Crosby certainly looked comparable in his first two seasons, but he seems to have fallen DRASTICALLY off the pace now. The only true positive I can say for Crosby is that he did manage to help take his team to a cup finals, which is impressive for such a young captain. Also, he was injured much of last year. But so far he's looked more fragile than Wayne, and isn't putting up anywhere near the points.
I look back at my posts a couple of years ago, and I will say that I was overly optimistic about Crosby's impact in the NHL.
I think he has been hampered by a few things, some his own doing, and some just the game.
For one, he has never consistently had decent linemates. That has hurt (and will continue to hurt) his production. He does have Malkin, but that's limited, and in an 82 game season, you need to have linemates than can score. CVolby Armstrong, Tyler Kennedy, Miro Satan, ascal Dupuis, Mark Recchi...all quality players in their own right, but none of them can carry Kurri's jock.
Another issue - the goaltending is so good right now, it's tough to score a pile of points. Even Malkin, as great a year as he had, scored just over half of what Gretzky got in his best season. Swallow that for a minute, and you realize how different the game is right now.
I still believe this is his era for the taking, but I am not as sure as I once was about just how much he will dominate. I do believe he is going to outscore Ovechkin, career-wise, but without question, he needs to become a more effective shooter than he is right now.
Given the choice of which guy to take with 2 years of perspective? I'd still take Crosby over 1984 Gretzky. I think he is a more complete player.
Don't forget, the kid is still only 21. |
|
|
|
Guest8801
( )
|
Posted - 05/05/2009 : 00:02:49
|
I agreed with everything you said up until the part where you'd take Crosby over 1984 Gretzky. Yes, Crosby is more complete. But so were a lot of guys. None of them ever scored 215 points in a season. I think completeness is great, but its also a little overrated sometimes. The reason it's a team sport is because different people fill different roles. Gretzky didn't need to be a "complete player" because he was putting up offensive numbers that will never be beaten.
When history looks back on these players, there will be a lot of people written about in the top 25 and top 50 of all time, who will be listed as being "complete players." Gretzky will not be one of these. But on all these lists he will be listed as the greatest offensive player to ever live. Without MAJOR restructuring of the game, 50 years from now his records will still stand (don't forget, most have survived half that long already, and most haven't been challenged).
Just for clarification, when I say his records will stil be standing, I don't mean all 60 records he holds today (or is it 61??) I mostly mean his 50 in 39 games, 163 assists in a season, 215 points in a season, and career assists/points records. I think its conceivable that someone may one day beat his career goals record (I say conceivable, not likely), or even his 92 goals in a season (which is pretty unlikely as well, but at least a couple people have broken 80).
Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to bash Crosby. I'm one of those who thought he'd be dominating much more than he has been though. I figured after that 120 point sophmore season he was only going to get better. But last year he had injuries, and this year... who knows. He's a great player, but people need to stop comparing everyone who comes along to Gretzky and his records. |
|
|
|
Guest9281
( )
|
Posted - 05/05/2009 : 06:35:12
|
| After having read back through these posts, has anyone considered that "cherry-picker Gretzky" was held back by the two-line pass rule? I haven't ever seen it mentioned, and am curious to see what others think. Watching the playoffs this year(especially when watching the Canucks), it seems that the stretch pass is just another option on the break-out. |
|
|
|
Guest4449
( )
|
Posted - 06/04/2009 : 17:37:50
|
| Theres realy only one thing to say to everyone, And ill argue this with anybody. I(f not for being in alot of pain for his carrier in the nhl, All hockey compairisons would be about one player and one player only and he is mario lemieux. This man was an overwellming beast on the ice and was for the majority of his entire carreer on his own with what he was able to do. I guarantee you that if it had been mario with edm in the early 80's and was pain and injury free you would have seen numbers put up that would have been so rediculous there would never be another play that would ever have a shot at the records that man would set. Just to ad my other 2 cents, I grew up watching hockey since i was a kid as i was born in 73" And ill tell you what, Wayne was one of the biggest cherry pickin players that has ever played the game of hockey! And he had the future hall of fame players around him to help him with those rediculous numbers he put up! im not tryin to piss anybody off i just wanted to spice up the convo a bit. |
|
|
|
Guest9838
( )
|
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 08:27:22
|
Going back to Crosby being in the 79 draft... not sure if this angle was covered but I highly doubt in 79 Crosby would have been the same size/strength going into the draft. His conditioning and nutritional regimen would have been vastly different, so much has been learned since then. Would he have been the same player growing up in the 70's? would he have had the same junior stats as gretzky in that era? The flip side of the question could also be argued, what would Wayne look like having grown up in the 90s/00s....
just a thought. |
|
|
|
Guest7877
( )
|
Posted - 06/05/2009 : 08:50:01
|
Guest 4449
I am not taking anything at all away from Mario, another all time great. But to make a statemenet that if he was healthy and if this and that, come on man. You could make those statements about any player.
Fact remains, Gretzky put up those numbers that he did because of his skills and the players that surrounded him. Yes he was surrounded with HOF'rs but why should that be a knock on him?
Mario put up the numbers he did because of his skills. Could he have had better numbers if he stayed healthy? Likely, but nobody will ever know. Facts are facts and that is what is being compared, why attempt to cloud the facts with "what ifs", when in reality they don't mean a damn thing. |
|
|
|
fly4apuckguy
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
834 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2009 : 11:21:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7877
Guest 4449
I am not taking anything at all away from Mario, another all time great. But to make a statemenet that if he was healthy and if this and that, come on man. You could make those statements about any player.
Fact remains, Gretzky put up those numbers that he did because of his skills and the players that surrounded him. Yes he was surrounded with HOF'rs but why should that be a knock on him?
Mario put up the numbers he did because of his skills. Could he have had better numbers if he stayed healthy? Likely, but nobody will ever know. Facts are facts and that is what is being compared, why attempt to cloud the facts with "what ifs", when in reality they don't mean a damn thing.
I agree. Whenever someone brings up the Mario comparison, I say the same thing about Lindros (who was not a popular guy, but had amazing talent, no question).
If Lindros had managed a 20 year career and 80 game seasons, where would he be?
Like Mario, we'll never know.
So we go with the facts instead. |
|
|
|
mcmurphy
Top Prospect
USA
1 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2009 : 21:27:19
|
This question is obviously made for Canadians, by Canadians. I can't help but wonder if Cherry came up with this quesiton since the thought of a European being added is obviously unacceptable. Crosby can't be compared to the best ever because he isn't even the best player on his team (Malkin) let alone the best player currently in the league (Ovie). Now that said, Gretzky is better than all of the above!
Now with 50% less BS! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2009 : 05:07:43
|
Hilarious first post, mcmurphy. Excellent!
The fact that it isn't Malkin or Ovechkin being considered against Gretzky, but the 'Great Canadian Hope' Crosby, is a bit telling - yes, we are a Canadian site, what do you expect?. That being said, I do rate Crosby a hair above Malkin, but that is really splitting hairs.
Like you said though - Ovechkin isn't really all that close to Gretzky. But have we seen OV's best season yet? Perhaps not, so we wait and see . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
shazariahl
Top Prospect
50 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2009 : 12:04:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4449
I guarantee you that if it had been mario with edm in the early 80's and was pain and injury free you would have seen numbers put up that would have been so rediculous there would never be another play that would ever have a shot at the records that man would set.
So... basically exactly what Gretzky did? I mean seriously, no one will ever beat 215 pts in a season, 51 game scoring streak from start of season, 50 career hat tricks, 2800 career points, 1950 career assists, 163 (!!!!!!) assists in a season, 92 goals in a season, 50 goals in 39 games, etc. Not to be contentous, but you're saying that IF Mario had played for the Oilers, his records would have been unbeatable. But he didn't. Gretzky did, and the records he set are unbeatable. Maybe you think Mario's would be more unbeatable, but that's just conjecture, and its something I disagree with. I mean, some of Wayne's greatest records are his career ones, which was equal parts health/longevity and skill. Mario was missing half that formula. Its not like playing in Edmonton would have spared him from cancer or back injuries, so his career would still have been cut short. At best he could have maybe hoped to beat some of the single season records, but even then he's usually behind Gretzky's 2nd or 3rd best seasons, not just his best.
What I mean is, Mario had 85 goals in a season, but Gretzky had 87 and 92. Mario is 3rd (and tied for 3rd at that). Mario had 114 assists, but Wayne had 7 seasons better than that, and another season with 114 as well. So Mario is tied for 8th! 199 points puts him 5th, as Wayne broke 200 four times (and had 196, which wasn't far back of Mario either). Yes Mario's numbers would have been improved with a better supporting cast, but you seem to be thinking Wayne's numbers were a result of his cast, not the other way around.
Gretzky was often 100 points ahead of anyone else on his team. No one will ever convice me that people like Messier, Anderson, or Kurri had more to do with Wayne's success than he did with theirs. Mario, on the other hand, played with Jagir, who won 5 scoring titles of his own. Wayne NEVER had a linemate of that caliber. Yes Mario had some amazing seasons without any supporting cast at all - I am not trying to take that away from him. But by the time he started winning cups, he had a team as good as anything the Oilers had ever put on ice, and he still only won half as many cups and didn't break any of Wayne's records. Wayne also set many of these records when the Oilers weren't a good team at all (like when he first broke Espo's record for points in a season... on a team that didn't make the playoffs until the very last day of the season). He did 50 in 39 when the Oilers were battling for a playoff spot. He tied for league scoring his first year in the NHL, when Kurri didn't play, Messier had less than 25 goals, and the Oilers were 16th place overall - out of 21 teams. And he was a kid. Not all his success can be attributed to his teammates. If anything, the opposite is much closer to the truth.
|
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2009 : 08:16:44
|
Haven't been here for a while, but the line below caught my eye.
"by the time he (Mario) started winning cups, he had a team as good as anything the Oilers had ever put on ice"
In two words,
I DISAGREE!
Mario had a very good supporting cast in his Cup years, yes, but, take Wayne and Mario off those teams, and I think if the remaining guys play a series the Oilers take it either 4-1 or 4-2.
Some reasons that come to my mind right of the bat:
- Coffey was younger sharper, faster in his Oilers years compared to his Penguin years - significantly so in my opinion
- Team Speed of Oiler forwards (i.e. Anderson, Kurri) would provide a marked edge in that department
- The Messier factor - yes, Jagr was a 5 time scoring champ and obviously a great great player, but, if we are talking 80s Messier vs. early 90s Jagr, I'll take Messier - to really truly understand how good the Oiler teams of the 80s were requires a good understanding of just how much of a force Messier was at the time, not in terms of offensive production, but in terms of wear and tear on the opposing team - face him in those days and then in the next shift face Wayne? Tough, tough stuff.
- Last but not least, is the irrefutable fact that the remaining cast of the Oilers PRODUCED A CUP WITHOUT WAYNE GRETZKY - now that is INDEED a good supporting cast!
None of this is meant to get into the Wayne-Mario debate that apparently sparked the comment above. I just wanted to throw out my thoughts on that one sentence. I believe it is simply false. |
|
|
|
Guest3341
( )
|
Posted - 09/05/2009 : 10:58:49
|
Roster for penquins with stats for 1990 including playoffs http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000501991.html
AND
Roster for penquins with stats for 1991-1992 http://whwf4.tripod.com/roster_9192_of_penguins.htm
I might argue these teams as strong with or with out Lemieux Gretsky during some of the cup runs
Quick run down on 1991-1992 season/post season. Phil Bourque, Gord Dineen, Ron Francis, Jaromir Jagr, Shawn McEachern, Joey Mullen, Kjell Samuelsson, Ulf Samuelsson, Kevin Stevens, Rick Tocchet, Bryan Trottier, Tom Barrasso. All of these player were coveted player prior and/or post cup wins.
Now some might say the players who won the last cup for Edmonton might have had the best all around team if you took Gretzky/Lemieux out of the group and that I would agree with. |
|
|
|
shazariahl
Top Prospect
50 Posts |
Posted - 09/23/2009 : 23:35:41
|
Andy -
Not to be contentious, because I didn't mean those Penguin teams were the exact equal of the Oilers (though some may actually think they were as good or better). What I meant was, they were at least comparable. I agree that Lemieux didn't have the team early in his career, and still put up amazing numbers. I'm not trying to take anything away from Lemieux, who is certainly one of the greatest players to ever live. If he'd been healthy, who knows.
But, like others have said before me, when it comes down to a choice between:
1. Player A who has more goals, assists, and points both in his peak seasons and per game during those seasons and plays more games during those years, plus breaks nearly every offensive record imaginable while dominating the league (as judged by Harts and Art Ross trophies) for a decade, plus goes on to give me some pretty good years even at the end of his career when his prime is done
vs
2. Player B who looks better on ice, puts up nearly as many points in his peak seasons and per game during those seasons, but plays less games due to injury, plays far less games, has a shorter peak in number of seasons even during his prime, and misses several years due to disease (totally not his fault, but still a definite negative)
I have to pick player A. Even if Lemieux was slightly ahead in PPG or had slightly better seasons, but Gretzky was healthier and more consistant, it would be hard for me to pick Lemieux. But the fact that Gretzky was more productive AND healthier just seems too much to overlook. Others can judge things differently; that is their right. But I honestly believe that by nearly any form of rational comparison, Gretzky was better. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2009 : 04:55:40
|
Unless Crosby used to be called Super Mario back in the 90's, this topic has gone off the rails.
Save the Gretzky vs Lemieux rants for this thread here:
http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1733&whichpage=8
This is the Gretzky and CROSBY thread, where inventive young minds who never saw Gretzky play (and who may even be young enough to never have seen Lemieux play at his peak) can postulate about making some gossamer thin connections between arguably the greatest player of all time, and one of the top three players in the game today, who just happens to be the only Canadian in that group.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
brentrock2
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
571 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2009 : 12:43:42
|
Not much thought into this one but I would pick Gretzky.
HABS RULE!!
brentrock2 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Wayne Gretzky and Sidney Crosby 
