I agree with that, I always say staying healthy is a skill, and especially for players at the top of the game when you're comparing legacies, duration matters. You never know what happens if a guy stays healthy, he may actually tail off early. That's why I say Gretz is the "greatest," he did it for a long time while being a target. We'll never know what could have been for Orr, Lemieux. My point is only that I think those three are 'better'--a large assumption on my part that I think had they had full careers they'd be looked upon more favorably than Gretzky. However--I do think if McDavid plays until 35 he has the opportunity to rewrite everything. His dominance over his peers is something to behold and I think the best is yet to come.
Like I said it's a hot take and I don't have much to support it, haha.
I think we have to look at what Gretzky throughout all stages of his career.
As a rookie he tied for the league lead in scoring with 137 points as a scrawny 19 year old. Yes he had Blair McDonald who had a career high 94 points that year, followed by Weir with 66 and Lumly and Callahan with 56. He basically lit up the league as a 19 year old with little to no help.
Years 3 to 8 in the league he averaged over 200 points a year
If you take Gretzky from 19 to 27 he averaged 2.40 points a game or 192 points a year on a 80 game schedule.
During that same time Kurri averaged 1.38 points a game for an average of 110 points a year on a 80 game schedule
Messier averaged 1.16 for 93 points a game in the same years. Messier did go on to have a career high 129 points 2 years after Gretzky left, Gretzky led the league in scoring that year with 142 points
Gretzky goes on to turn 30 and puts up another 163 points, 72 more then his closest teammate Luc Robitaille
Now if at this time Gretzky suffers an injury and is not able to finish his career with 2142 points in 847 games.
His prime years 19 to 30 he averaged 2.53 ppg = an average of 202 points a year.
I think some of us forget just how dominant he was as he played an extra 10 years which diminished his numbers drastically.
I think if Lemieux and Orr would have had a 20 year career they too would have had father time catch up with them. We got what we got in their prime years and it was incredible but not as incredible as what Gretzky did in his. Gretzky then carried on 10 years past his prime still being at or near the top of the league even when he was playing on some miserable teams.
In short what all 3 did was spectacular. I still think Gretzky has the best 5 year stint this league will ever see and has nearly every all time record because he was able to persevere and last.
Not even going to comment on Connor, If he is still stunning the league in 10 years then he can get added into this discussion.
