1997 Playoffs: The game that Gretzky "turned back the clock"

[tazzy19]

This was a very unusual game for a 36 year old Gretzky…and not just because he scored a natural hat trick (in one period). Simply put, I've often wondered why (and how) during this game he looked completely 27 years old again. His skating, speed, shot, agility, and mobility all pretty much look pre-Gary Suter hit here. How was it that for this one game, Gretzky was able to turn back the clock? The last goal is not 36 year old Gretzky AT ALL. The speed in which he goes cross-ice, and then up-ice, and the stop on a dime, before the perfect slap shot off the post…. How was this possible? It's not in the video below, but he almost had 4 goals in that period -- almost scoring right at the end of the period on a partial break (with yet another snapshot), after deking out someone at the blue line. If anyone has the entire game, would really appreciate the link. It was just simply one of those rare moments in sports to see a 20 minute glimpse into the "prime" of the greatest of all time while he was well past his prime. Anyone have any idea why he was never able to duplicate this level of play again at this stage in his career, and how he was able to do it during this one period?

 

[GuineaPig]

Anyone have any idea why he was never able to duplicate this level of play again at this stage in his career, and how he was able to do it during this one period?

Every player has brief periods where they look unstoppable, even 4th line goons. The only difference here is that unstoppable just used to be Gretzky's average.

 

[The Panther]

I didn't see this game, but I did watch the NYR-Philly game in round three, in which Gretzky scored a hat-trick again (I think it was game 3). I also watched the October 1997 game at Vancouver, when he scored 3 goals and two assists.

Gretzky was still fairly incredible in 1996-97. He scored 97 points in the team's 258 goals, which means he was statistically in on 36% of their goals. That's quite a lot for an older player. (As a comparison, in his rookie season 1979-80 he was in on 46% of the Oilers' goals; in 1984-85 he was in on 52% of the Oilers' goals; in 1990-91 he was in on 48% of the Kings' goals; in 1993-94 he was in on 44% of the Kings' goals).

One would assume he had considerably less ice-team with NYR in '97 as well.

However, in the following season 1997-98, Gretzky was actually in on 46% of the Rangers' goals! They scored a lot less, and there was no Messier anymore.

----------------

I think he was generally healthy by the mid-90s, and his back didn't bother him that much anymore (that was more of an issue circa 1991-1993). He always had had an incredible slapshot. Maybe in the '97 playoffs, the coaching staff simply asked him to take more close-range shots instead of passing? In the regular season, he had a fairly dismal 8.7% shooting, but in the playoffs 22.7%!

 

[feffan]

I´ve had problems with mainly my knees, but being a tall guy also my back. Somedays you can´t explain why, but you get those days that your body feels like it did at 22, 25 or even 30 AND how it felt before those injuries. The speed and agility is there for a game or two again. Probably a prefect balance of being as fit and well rested as you can be at the same time.

He also had this game in 96:
[/QUOTE]

The whole sequence starting at 2.30 with Gretzky heading for "his office" before the play i set and Robitaille signaling for him to wait and circuling out of the zone to get free is fantastic.

 

[ozzie]

Honestly Gretzky was still pretty good that year, he just needed more time to recover. He was still able to play at an elite level, just not every game. His legs and jump were just not as consistent, as you'd expect with age. His mind however was still as sharp as ever.

Gretzky was also the type of guy to really play well during the playoffs, so it is no surprise he still had a lot left in him during what would be his last run.

Still one of the most underrated slap shots in the game, so accurate when he was on. As many people described it, sneaky and deceptive, not over powering.

 

[tazzy19]

I´ve had problems with mainly my knees, but being a tall guy also my back. Somedays you can´t explain why, but you get those days that your body feels like it did at 22, 25 or even 30 AND how it felt before those injuries. The speed and agility is there for a game or two again. Probably a prefect balance of being as fit and well rested as you can be at the same time.

He also had this game in 96:


The whole sequence starting at 2.30 with Gretzky heading for "his office" before the play i set and Robitaille signaling for him to wait and circuling out of the zone to get free is fantastic.

So true what you say about the perfect balance of being well rested and fit. Gretzky sad that he was feeling super good at the time because he had lost weight just before the playoffs, and felt lighter and more agile and flexible as a result.

As for the game you posted where Gretzky set up 3 goals from behind the net...I love the fan screaming, "No more! No More! No more!!!" after the 3rd assist in OT in Montreal. Classic!! Lol

 

[GuineaPig]

As for the game you posted where Gretzky set up 3 goals from behind the net...I love the fan screaming, "No more! No More! No more!!!" after the 3rd assist in OT in Montreal. Classic!! Lol

For me the clear best part is that the crowd totally knows what's coming, even if the defense doesn't.

 

[nikonsniper*]

He was still a +PPG player at that time. Yeah, he was 36, but still one of the better players in the game (4th in scoring that year).


I also can't get over his frame. I mean, his legs are twigs! he's like a 12-year old out there.

 

[nikonsniper*]

For me the clear best part is that the crowd totally knows what's coming, even if the defense doesn't.

Even when they do have an idea of what he is going to do, they still cant stop him. He could not be contained, and thats what seperates him from todays stars (Ovechkin, Crosby, etc)

 

[Big Phil]

I know there was mention as to his back healing by then. Maybe it had, but lots of things still bothered him by then. He was old, he was worn down, he had lost a step. He was still as smart as heck, which made him still very good at that time.

I look at it similar to the 1993 playoffs. Obviously he played better at that time and was 4 years younger. But even after 1991 we sometimes saw the Gretzky of old in glimpses. Sometimes long glimpses. 1993 was one of those glimpses. 1997 to a lesser extent was too. And remember, that whole postseason he was on fire, not just that one game. The stars aligned for him that game, but he was a force that postseason.

Someone else posted about Gretzky's hat trick against Vancouver in November 1997. Why did he do that? Who knows? Everyone can have a noticeably better game than their average. He did. Even at that age he still surprised everyone.

 

[tazzy19]

I know there was mention as to his back healing by then. Maybe it had, but lots of things still bothered him by then. He was old, he was worn down, he had lost a step. He was still as smart as heck, which made him still very good at that time.

I look at it similar to the 1993 playoffs. Obviously he played better at that time and was 4 years younger. But even after 1991 we sometimes saw the Gretzky of old in glimpses. Sometimes long glimpses. 1993 was one of those glimpses. 1997 to a lesser extent was too. And remember, that whole postseason he was on fire, not just that one game. The stars aligned for him that game, but he was a force that postseason.

Someone else posted about Gretzky's hat trick against Vancouver in November 1997. Why did he do that? Who knows? Everyone can have a noticeably better game than their average. He did. Even at that age he still surprised everyone

The difference between that game and the playoff game vs Florida is, in the Florida game, Gretz actually looked like he was 27 years old out there. The speed and everything else that defined his prime were put on full display. In the Vancouver game, he may have looked like he was toying with everyone (which he was), but he looked like a 37 year old toying with everyone (if that makes any sense). He didn't have the speed he had against Florida. It was more like he made Vancouver look like the farm team they were playing like. Against Florida, they just could not keep up to him despite the playoff intensity both teams were displaying.

 

[NYR94]

That's the Great One for ya. Even late in his career, he could take over and look like a player in his prime again. He was huge for the Rangers during that playoff run. Talent, experience, the rejuvenation that comes with playing playoff hockey, etc. lets the best players appear to turn back the clock. He was smart enough to save some in the tank for the playoffs.

But I remember watching that hat trick game. What a crazy night. Tikkanen was on fire that playoff run as well.

 

[Calderon]

I'm always baffled by how the best player of the game could look so physically awkward on the ice in terms of skating and appearance. Maybe it's just me but I never saw him as a smooth athlete but more like a guy who had been introduced to the game not too long ago. He looked like someone who would have trouble getting up if he fell down and who couldn't make a convincing body deke to get past a defenseman.

Maybe it's due to the particular hockey gear he used or an unusual skating posture (higher than average need to see the ice to be able to dish those genius passes) or something else but as a figure or a shape he never seemed like he belonged to that environment, although in reality it was exactly in the rink and on the ice where he felt the most comfortable.

 

[The Panther]

Gretzky did skate awkwardly -- he was always hunched over, which is how they teach you not to skate.

(It's a bit like how Ichiro Suzuki's batting style is exactly how players are coached not to hit -- but y'know, if a hockey player gets 200 points a year and a baseball player gets 230 hits a season, who is 'right' and 'wrong'??)

My theory about Gretzky's unique genius is that everything he did on the ice was about finding space.

He is probably the only skilled player I've seen who avoided traffic incessantly. It's obvious that Gretzky wasn't the kind of player to go in the corners or enter a scrum, but it's way beyond that -- his entire offensive strategy was based on open ice to create space and time. He never entered the area of traffic. He never tried to split the defence unless there was a clear open lane. He never drove to the net if an opposing player was blocking his path.

And it's beyond that as well. If you watch him skate with the puck, even when other players are in pursuit of him, he doesn't 'protect' the puck as normal skilled players do. Instead, he often pushes the puck away from himself, seemingly into another zone on the ice that might risk losing control of it. But he doesn't. Somehow, by pushing the puck beyond his range of immediate control, he creates space for himself and distance from the opposing players. To put it another way, he was always reaching for the puck, even when he had full control. He never protected it.

I do think part of his unique style was based on self-preservation. He earned a spot on a team of 10-year-olds when he was 6, and his career followed this pattern. From age 6 to 19, he was always the youngest player on the team. He was always the smallest. Even when the other players caught up to his age by his third or fourth year in the League, he was always the physically weakest player on his team (year after year, he came dead-last in the Oilers' physical tests of strength; he was also poor in other physical tests). Only by existing in his own space on the ice could he survive and thrive against bigger competition, year-after-year, which wanted to eliminate him.

Somehow Gretzky almost created another dimension on the ice for himself to play in. It's all about creating space.

 

[tazzy19]

Gretzky did skate awkwardly -- he was always hunched over, which is how they teach you not to skate.

(It's a bit like how Ichiro Suzuki's batting style is exactly how players are coached not to hit -- but y'know, if a hockey player gets 200 points a year and a baseball player gets 230 hits a season, who is 'right' and 'wrong'??)

My theory about Gretzky's unique genius is that everything he did on the ice was about finding space.

He is probably the only skilled player I've seen who avoided traffic incessantly. It's obvious that Gretzky wasn't the kind of player to go in the corners or enter a scrum, but it's way beyond that -- his entire offensive strategy was based on open ice to create space and time. He never entered the area of traffic. He never tried to split the defence unless there was a clear open lane. He never drove to the net if an opposing player was blocking his path.

And it's beyond that as well. If you watch him skate with the puck, even when other players are in pursuit of him, he doesn't 'protect' the puck as normal skilled players do. Instead, he often pushes the puck away from himself, seemingly into another zone on the ice that might risk losing control of it. But he doesn't. Somehow, by pushing the puck beyond his range of immediate control, he creates space for himself and distance from the opposing players. To put it another way, he was always reaching for the puck, even when he had full control. He never protected it.

I do think part of his unique style was based on self-preservation. He earned a spot on a team of 10-year-olds when he was 6, and his career followed this pattern. From age 6 to 19, he was always the youngest player on the team. He was always the smallest. Even when the other players caught up to his age by his third or fourth year in the League, he was always the physically weakest player on his team (year after year, he came dead-last in the Oilers' physical tests of strength; he was also poor in other physical tests). Only by existing in his own space on the ice could he survive and thrive against bigger competition, year-after-year, which wanted to eliminate him.

Somehow Gretzky almost created another dimension on the ice for himself to play in. It's all about creating space.

Beautiful post. Gretzky created space (and therefore, time) on a hockey rink better than any player has on any playing surface of any sport. It was almost like he was the Startrek Enterprise continuasy playing inside a warp field, which enabled him to slip through the fabric of space/time (or at least behind the scope of everyone else's perception of it). How else do you explain a play like this at 9:49:



The drop pass to Rochefort (just after Gilmour came out of the penalty box) to create an odd man rush was sublime to say the least. It was almost spooky. Almost proof that Gretzky was an alien. It was such a fluid and clever play -- going over the heads of every player and observer, alike -- that it doesn't even look that special even on the replay to the untrained eye until you analyze what he was doing there. Unbelievable to pull that off in game time, let alone be creative enough to conceive it with the advantage of replay and observation.

 

[Big Phil]

The difference between that game and the playoff game vs Florida is, in the Florida game, Gretz actually looked like he was 27 years old out there. The speed and everything else that defined his prime were put on full display. In the Vancouver game, he may have looked like he was toying with everyone (which he was), but he looked like a 37 year old toying with everyone (if that makes any sense). He didn't have the speed he had against Florida. It was more like he made Vancouver look like the farm team they were playing like. Against Florida, they just could not keep up to him despite the playoff intensity both teams were displaying.

I don't know, I think he just played above even his own head at that time. He just got his legs that game. Maybe the early goal game him some momentum. Florida was a defensive team with one of the better goalies in Beezer at that time so it wasn't as if he was doing it to a team that wasn't trying to contain him. Maybe he thought this was one of his last kicks at the can. Maybe he knew Messier may not be coming back. Who knows. But that was the last of the "special" Gretzky that we saw. And even then we all know he was much better than that in the 1980s and pre-1991. After the 1997 playoffs he had a good year with 90 points, but didn't stand out in the Olympics, the Rangers missed the postseason and he retired the year after. 1997 was the last time you said to yourself that there were times when Gretzky could still look like the best player in the game.

 

[ForsbergForever]

Gretzky did skate awkwardly -- he was always hunched over, which is how they teach you not to skate.

(It's a bit like how Ichiro Suzuki's batting style is exactly how players are coached not to hit -- but y'know, if a hockey player gets 200 points a year and a baseball player gets 230 hits a season, who is 'right' and 'wrong'??)

My theory about Gretzky's unique genius is that everything he did on the ice was about finding space.

He is probably the only skilled player I've seen who avoided traffic incessantly. It's obvious that Gretzky wasn't the kind of player to go in the corners or enter a scrum, but it's way beyond that -- his entire offensive strategy was based on open ice to create space and time. He never entered the area of traffic. He never tried to split the defence unless there was a clear open lane. He never drove to the net if an opposing player was blocking his path.

And it's beyond that as well. If you watch him skate with the puck, even when other players are in pursuit of him, he doesn't 'protect' the puck as normal skilled players do. Instead, he often pushes the puck away from himself, seemingly into another zone on the ice that might risk losing control of it. But he doesn't. Somehow, by pushing the puck beyond his range of immediate control, he creates space for himself and distance from the opposing players. To put it another way, he was always reaching for the puck, even when he had full control. He never protected it.

I do think part of his unique style was based on self-preservation. He earned a spot on a team of 10-year-olds when he was 6, and his career followed this pattern. From age 6 to 19, he was always the youngest player on the team. He was always the smallest. Even when the other players caught up to his age by his third or fourth year in the League, he was always the physically weakest player on his team (year after year, he came dead-last in the Oilers' physical tests of strength; he was also poor in other physical tests). Only by existing in his own space on the ice could he survive and thrive against bigger competition, year-after-year, which wanted to eliminate him.

Somehow Gretzky almost created another dimension on the ice for himself to play in. It's all about creating space.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the one physical 'gift' that Gretz had was an incredible recovery time, where after heading back to the bench after a shift he only needed a few seconds to get his wind back and for his heart rate to slow back to normal (I might be mistaken, but this just popped into my mind for some reason).

 

[tazzy19]

I don't know, I think he just played above even his own head at that time. He just got his legs that game. Maybe the early goal game him some momentum. Florida was a defensive team with one of the better goalies in Beezer at that time so it wasn't as if he was doing it to a team that wasn't trying to contain him. Maybe he thought this was one of his last kicks at the can. Maybe he knew Messier may not be coming back. Who knows. But that was the last of the "special" Gretzky that we saw. And even then we all know he was much better than that in the 1980s and pre-1991. After the 1997 playoffs he had a good year with 90 points, but didn't stand out in the Olympics, the Rangers missed the postseason and he retired the year after. 1997 was the last time you said to yourself that there were times when Gretzky could still look like the best player in the game.

Yes, another great post, and I agree with everything here. I would go so far as to say that Gretzky was the best player in the game during the 1997 playoffs. Had the Rangers made it past Philly, there is little doubt in my mind he would have led the playoffs in scoring. A little known fact: From Christmas to the end of the year in 1997, Gretz was the top scorer in the NHL. Another one: with one week remaining in that same season, Gretz had sole possession of 2nd overall in NHL scoring. Forbsberg ended up taking 2nd by one point!

 

[Stephen]

I'm always baffled by how the best player of the game could look so physically awkward on the ice in terms of skating and appearance. Maybe it's just me but I never saw him as a smooth athlete but more like a guy who had been introduced to the game not too long ago. He looked like someone who would have trouble getting up if he fell down and who couldn't make a convincing body deke to get past a defenseman.

Maybe it's due to the particular hockey gear he used or an unusual skating posture (higher than average need to see the ice to be able to dish those genius passes) or something else but as a figure or a shape he never seemed like he belonged to that environment, although in reality it was exactly in the rink and on the ice where he felt the most comfortable.

I always felt the same way about Jaromir Jagr. The guy looks terrible and awkward even when he's deking everyone out. Choppy looking skating, weird swooping moves, looks like an amateur.

 

[GuineaPig]

I always felt the same way about Jaromir Jagr. The guy looks terrible and awkward even when he's deking everyone out. Choppy looking skating, weird swooping moves, looks like an amateur.

Jagr and Gretzky are both players I could identify if I was watching a game from a kilometer away, because their skating styles are so unique.

 

[Crease]

That 1997 playoff run by Gretzky is one of the big reasons he made the HFNYR Top 10 Rangers Centers of All-Time list. Well, that and the Rangers are historically thin at the center position.

Interesting. We should be careful of using "Top 10" finishes here, because in the Original Six era, only four teams qualified for the playoffs. Less competition. Easier to be a top-10 point-getter than, say, Gretzky, who competed against players from 16 teams in 1997 playoffs. I started to see a lot of parallels between the Ranger versions of Gretzky and O'Connor: Guys in the twilight of their career. One big playoff run. So I looked closer.

This table summarizes regular season performance, by year. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points, where the player ranked in the NHL in points, and the percentile ranking in the league (which adjusts for league size).

Year | Player | Age | Adj G | Adj A | Adj P | Team Rank | League Rank | Percentile
1947-48 | Buddy O'Connor | 31 | 31 | 56 | 87 | 1 | 2 | 98th
1948-49 | Buddy O'Connor | 32 | 15 | 40 | 55 | 1 | 23 | 82nd
1949-50 | Buddy O'Connor | 33 | 13 | 31 | 44 | 6 | 37 | 75th
1950-51 | Buddy O'Connor | 34 | 20 | 29 | 49 | 3 | 26 | 83rd
1996-97 | Wayne Gretzky | 36 | 26 | 75 | 101 | 1 | 5 | 99th
1997-98 | Wayne Gretzky | 37 | 26 | 77 | 103 | 1 | 4 | 99th
1998-99 | Wayne Gretzky | 38 | 10 | 60 | 70 | 1 | 36 | 96th

O'Conner led the Rangers in points in two of four seasons. In 1947-48, he outscored the second best Ranger by 28%. In 1948-49, he outscored the second best Ranger by 13%.

Gretzky led the Rangers in points in three of three seasons. By 15%, 45%, and 13% respectively.

O'Connor finished 2nd overall in points in 1947-48. Gretzky finished 4th and 5th in seasons with 5x more players. How important do we want to make league size here? 37th in points in 1949-50 meant you were just about better than 75% of the league. 36th in points in 1998-99 meant you were just about better than 96% of the league.

Let's get back to the playoffs, because that appears to be the strongest aspect of O'Connor's Rangers resume. O'Connor had two runs: 1948 and 1950. Gretzky had one run: 1997. The table below summarizes the three runs, using real points because Hockey Reference doesn't provide adjusted points for the playoffs. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points and where the player ranked in the NHL in points.

Year | Player | GP | G | A | P | Team Rank | League Rank
1948 | Buddy O'Connor | 6 | 1 | 4 | 5 | T-1 | T-10
1950 | Buddy O'Connor | 12 | 4 | 2 | 6 | T-6 | T-10
1997 | Wayne Gretzky | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 1 | T-7

O'Connor was tied for 1st on the Rangers in playoff points in 1948. Tied for 10th for all players involved in the playoffs. A couple of things to note: Four teams make the playoffs, so less competition than Gretzky to get into the top 10. However, he did finish top 10 despite not reaching the finals, which 8 of 9 guys in front of him did.

Gretzky was far and away the Rangers best player in the 1997 playoffs. He outscored the second best Ranger by 67%. He finished tied for 7th in scoring in the playoffs despite not reaching the finals. This is a snapshot of the point leaderboard (including Gretzky) at the end of the 3rd round when the Rangers were eliminated:

Player | Age | GP | G | A | P
Sakic | 27 | 17 | 8 | 17 | 25
Lindros | 23 | 15 | 11 | 12 | 23
Lemieux | 31 | 17 | 13 | 10 | 23
Kamensky | 30 | 17 | 8 | 14 | 22
Gretzky | 36 | 15 | 10 | 10 | 20
Leclair | 27 | 15 | 7 | 11 | 18
Brind'Amour | 26 | 15 | 10 | 7 | 17
Fedorov | 27 | 16 | 5 | 9 | 14

Leclair and Brind'Amour leapfrogged Gretzky during the finals. Fedorov finished tied with him.

O'Connor was pretty much a given for the top 10 when this project started. Gretzky not. So do we have O'Connor too high? Or Gretzky too low?

Gretzky factored in on 20 of 36 playoff goals the Rangers had that spring. 56 percent.

 

[tazzy19]

That 1997 playoff run by Gretzky is one of the big reasons he made the HFNYR Top 10 Rangers Centers of All-Time list. Well, that and the Rangers are historically thin at the center position.



Gretzky factored in on 20 of 36 playoff goals the Rangers had that spring. 56 percent.

This is more evidence for me that Gretz would have finished 1st in playoff scoring had the Rangers made it to the finals. Thanks for these stats. Lindros ended up winning the playoff scoring race by scoring a mere 3 points in the finals. Gretzky always scored well over a point a game in the playoffs - finals or otherwise - and only would have needed 6 points in the finals to win the top spot.

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

That Vancouver four-point game... I recall that all of the Team Canada brass for Nagano were in attendance that night. There was a lot of talk at that time that Canada needed to move on and leave Gretzky at home.

So no surprise that 99 goes out and fills the net... You just didn't question that guy. At least not out loud. At least not if you wanted to win against him. It was uncanny.

 

[tazzy19]

That Vancouver four-point game... I recall that all of the Team Canada brass for Nagano were in attendance that night. There was a lot of talk at that time that Canada needed to move on and leave Gretzky at home.

So no surprise that 99 goes out and fills the net... You just didn't question that guy. At least not out loud. At least not if you wanted to win against him. It was uncanny.

Not to be a nitpicker, but Gretz had 5 points that game:

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

Not to be a nitpicker, but Gretz had 5 points that game:

Not nitpicking at all. Just proves my point even more