Best Peak: Gretzky vs Lemieux vs Orr
- Thread starter blundluntman
- Start date
WalterLundy
Registered User
So it looks like his highest was when his ppg peaked (after 40 game half season cutoff) in 1989 when he had 137 in 47 games. That’s a 239 pace so close but not 250. He didn’t outdo this in ‘88, ‘90, ‘92, ‘93 or ‘96 which were the other 2 PPG and above seasons he had. In terms of both of them playing 70% or more of a season, Gretzky had 171 in 57 games in 1983-84 for a 246 in 82 game pace (even though these were 80 game seasons) and Lemieux’s was also from ‘89 and not ‘93 yet again where he put up 169 in 62 for a 224 pace in 82 games. For what it’s worth you probably won’t find a bigger fan of Mario than me. Our kids were on the same hockey team at one point and without him my city wouldn’t have hockey or any of the great memories. Great person too. You won’t meet too many guys that high level in sports that are as good as him as a man. I just won’t put him above Gretzky because I objectively can’t do that.
WalterLundy
Registered User
- Wayne Gretzky ‘83-‘84: 57 GP: 73 G, 98 A, 171 PTS (3.0 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘84-‘85: 60 GP: 60 G, 107 A, 167 PTS (2.78 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘81-‘82: 64 GP: 79 G, 97 A, 176 PTS (2.75 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘85-‘86: 68 GP: 48 G, 139 A, 187 PTS (2.75 PPG)
- Mario Lemieux ‘88-‘89: 62 GP: 65 G, 104 A, 169 PTS (2.73 PPG)
- Mario Lemieux ‘92-‘93: 58 GP: 67 G, 90 A, 157 PTS (2.71 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘86-‘87: 59 GP: 53 G, 94 A, 147 PTS (2.49 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘82-‘83: 57 GP: 46 G, 94 A, 140 PTS (2.46 PPG)
- Wayne Gretzky ‘87-‘88: 63 GP: 40 G, 108 A, 148 PTS (2.35 PPG)
- Mario Lemieux ‘95-‘96: 62 GP: 63 G, 83 A, 146 PTS (2.35 PPG)
Nathaniel Skywalker
DIG IN!!! RiGHT NOW!!!
- Oct 18, 2013
- 14,258
- 5,917
WalterLundy
Registered User
So if we use the formula on hockey reference here’s what they “adjust” to
83-84 Gretzky: 136 in 57 (2.39)
95-96 Lemieux: 141 in 62 (2.27)
88-89 Lemieux: 140 in 62 (2.26)
84-85 Gretzky: 133 in 60 (2.22)
92-93 Lemieux: 127 in 58 (2.19)
85-86 Gretzky: 148 in 68 (2.18)
So clearly Gretzky still has the best partial season/best stretch of play out of these. If you do a basic G/GP adjustment to 3G/GP 83-84 is the best one as well. (2.28 for 84 WG and 2.24 for 96 ML). Both methods are severely flawed and adjusting numbers to crap is pretty dumb when used as confirmation bias (not accusing you of that)
This also shows the limitations of adjustments in this manner because 95-96 is higher than 89 and 93 Mario. As someone who attended 25 home games in 96 and saw a ton in 89 and 93 I can tell you that 96 was a notch down from 82-86 Gretzky and 89/93 Mario. Nobody seriously believes that 96 Mario is the second best stretch of play in the history of hockey. No matter how you crunch the numbers 84 Gretzky is the best.
Also a big SW guy to go along with the pens fandom so that deserves respect.
Over 6 years from 1981-82 to 1986-87 Gretzky scored:
437 G - 782 A - 1219 P
That’s a HoF stat line if someone puts up those totals over a 15 year career.
It’s a season average of 73G - 130A - 203P
No one else has ever scored 200 points in a season even if Mario came damn close with his 199 point season but Gretz averaged it over 6 full years.
437 G - 782 A - 1219 P
That’s a HoF stat line if someone puts up those totals over a 15 year career.
It’s a season average of 73G - 130A - 203P
No one else has ever scored 200 points in a season even if Mario came damn close with his 199 point season but Gretz averaged it over 6 full years.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,828
- 10,275
Your own lack of knowledge and context doesn’t make someone like Gretzky overrated.
I’ll hand it to you though. It didn’t take you many words to tell me that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
I didn't say Gretzky was overrated. I said that in these conversations (who was better between him and Lemieux), he is always overrated. I know it's difficult for a Gretzky fanboy like you to accept, but some of us have good reasons to believe Lemieux was a better player. Put him on the stacked 80s Oilers and he gets even more points than Wayne.
Sorry if I upset you, though.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,828
- 10,275
Best part is that it’s preceded with 301 points in 2 seasons and followed by 622 points in 4 seasons, while missing 27 games. 154 point average surrounding the 203 point average.
I didn't say Gretzky was overrated. I said that in these conversations (who was better between him and Lemieux), he is always overrated. I know it's difficult for a Gretzky fanboy like you to accept, but some of us have good reasons to believe Lemieux was a better player. Put him on the stacked 80s Oilers and he gets even more points than Wayne.
Sorry if I upset you, though.
*checks list*
Yep, Gretzky and Lemieux remain my two favorite players ever and I’ve probably written more posts and threads admiring what Lemieux brought to the table because every now and then, I fall victim to the boredom that comes with discussing a player who did everything Lemieux did, first, quicker, better, and for longer.
And because someone needs to counter the fairy tales of Lemieux doing what Gretzky already did, if only he was an entirely different person than who he was.
When you make comments diminishing Gretzky because of his team, you’re going to get called out. I’m not going to write my usual essays explaining how Gretzky doubled up his closest teammate in points during his first 200 point campaign, out scored #2 and #3 combined, and a dozen other reasons why the take of Gretzky only achieving what he did because of who he played with is tired, dull, and dreadful in the sack.
Your reasons are fantasies. Fantasies about what one player might have done because they’re more alluring than the reality of what another player did over and over and over.
I don’t know how this overlooked so often. The Edmonton teams won a cup right after Gretzky left. That’s how stacked they were.
Mario absolutely carried some real garbage teams up until the early 90s before they got some talent.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,828
- 10,275
First off, already a big fan of your posts.
Question. As someone who has the history with the Penguins that you do, where does solely the first half of the 1995-1996 season rank when it comes to Lemieux’s personal best?
The 16 goals and 40 points in his first 12 games (15 team games), a personal 28 game point streak to open the season, hitting 100 points in 38 games (44 team games), 109 in 41 (48 team games). Up until about the end of January 1996, where do you think it ranks compared to his more obvious best stretches of play when he was younger?
WalterLundy
Registered User
Thank you. Your posts are excellent as well. I obviously would have to say that the first portion of the 95-96 season compares pretty well with his 93 and 89 from a purely statistical standpoint and in terms of each years environment for league and elite scoring. You would think it was on par with those two for just a half season statistically speaking. Being on pace for over 200 points for half a season was a topic of discussion we all had. I vividly remember my friends and I thinking this would be the year he finally becomes the second member of the 200 point club. I remember him selectively sitting games obviously but with how offensively explosive they were we thought it was possible in the first half of the season. If I remember correctly he sat certain road games but again I could be wrong.
From an eye test perspective he was clearly not on the 93 level and certainly not 89 level. What is interesting is that through each of their first 41 games you showed Lemieux’s stats but Jagr had 84 in 41 and Francis had 75 in 41. So along with Lemieux’s insane pace you had a Jagr near 170 pace and Francis at 150. This team was totally not what the league average scoring indicates. They were scoring at a ridiculous rate and their powerplay was sickening. I don’t think any team has had 3 players pace for over 150 through half a season simultaneously. I don’t have the data for it but I remember there was a point where it felt like Powerplays started to diminish. The numbers seem to reflect what I remember because Jagr in his second half (after their 41 game starts) had 65 in 41, Francis had 44 in 36 and Lemieux himself had 52 in 29 so the paces drop to 147 for Mario, 130 for Jagr and 100 for Francis. This is telling because even though I don’t have the data for how Powerplays dropped it FELT like it. Lemieux in ‘97 to my eyes at least didn’t look that much behind his ‘96 self. His stats were just more in line with the second half of ‘96 because (at least I think) less powerplays. Some people may think differently but to me there wasn’t much of a drop off in play. I know that even strength ‘96 and ‘97 are very similar.
A ‘93 or ‘89 Lemieux on this team would be far more dominant at even strength and in general on this team. I can’t think of a better environment to rack up points than this 1996 Penguins team. Especially as (in my opinion) arguably the best powerplay force ever. Even with being top heavy I think a younger Lemieux (and Francis in the playoffs) wins a cup that year. Even with Colorado.
Last edited:
WalterLundy
Registered User
I don’t know if it’s overlooked. Maybe it’s my personal perspective but from where I’m from if Gretzky is brought up you will hear Rob Brown’s name within 2 minutes. It’s a natural response to a name that deeply troubles/triggers the more insecure fans of the pens. I have been in many situations where people do everything they can do diminish Gretzky and elevate Lemieux when there is no case to do so. I’m of the belief the penguins have the best collection of top end all time talent. I wish that were enough for our bunch. I can attest that Gretzky lives rent free in most penguins fans and to be honest they should just appreciate him and not tear him or any other great down. As a fan of all great players I wish there were more but I digress. Wayne played on a great team but even in 1981-82 they weren’t the Oilers dynasty that is commonly used. Plus he outscored his teammates by such a margin that it honestly wouldn’t have mattered who he played with and he’d have 200+. That’s the thing with Mario as well. Both of them were capable of that level at their absolute best with any support cast. Wayne’s first two years were on subpar teams. He started his career better statistically than Mario did while on bad expansion team squads as well. Also the year Gretzky was traded 88-89 he went on to eliminate his former team in the playoffs while putting up a season better than anyone not named Gretzky or Lemieux. He was still amazing. Just a ton of mileage already regular and postseason and he was still arguably better than anyone ever outside of his former self at even strength.
We’ve had Mario, Jagr, Crosby, and Malkin. I doubt very much that Gretzky lives rent free in many of our heads. The only time I think about him is when someone asks who is the 2nd best player of all time.
WalterLundy
Registered User
Right like I said we have the best collection of talent. If anecdotal stuff is valuable to you then maybe your doubt will be quelled here. Nearly 40 years of personal encounters and just seeing/hearing just how badly Gretzky’s superiority and universal standing among hockey destroys the minds of more penguin fans than I can count. This isn’t new. It started pretty early with the “Wayne who? We’ve got Lemieux”. Slightly over half that I’ve talked to and met are either admittedly biased or closeted. There is a reason that our reputation as a fanbase is so ghastly in areas like this. And you may be different and actually believe that and not have him on your mind. I won’t accuse you of that. There are many who aren’t like that though. There is a reason why people come online and desperately cling to what if scenarios and use a calculator coupled with faulty assumptions and whacked out adjustment methods for guys who are 5 years apart as a coping mechanism for the reality they find themselves in. When I think of the actual second best player ever I think of Lemieux or Orr. Since I actually know Mario personally I’ll tell him there is an online minority voice that are on his side.
Everything that you said there doesn't take away from the fact that Gretzky padded those stats on a stacked championship team. He was obviously better than everyone else on that team, but the rest of the team was still very good and it helped him reach higher numbers than he would have on another team. That you try and deny that makes you lose any sort of credibility in my eyes.
I can only imagine what a player like McDavid would have done with that stacked of an offensive team. Right now he's mainly playing with Draisaitl, kind of like how Lemieux had Jagr.
BraveCanadian
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2010
- 15,538
- 4,943
Kind of like Lemieux had Francis, Jagr, Murphy, Tocchet, Stevens etc. you mean..
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,828
- 10,275
Going back and watching old Oilers and Canada Cup games 1984 is when Gretzky looks the best to me, seems like he was a legitimately fast and very agile player at that point to go along with his superior hockey sense. Though Gretzky will always rank #1 all-time I still can’t really see him out scoring Lemieux in the 90s - modern day NHL even if both were the same ages. Lemieux’s size/skill and also underrated IQ in comparison to Gretzky were huge reasons why he aged better despite facing more advanced goaltending and defense and competing with a larger talent pool. Do you think there’s any merit to that opinion or do you believe Gretzky would’ve still outscored him no matter what in the modern game?
WalterLundy
Registered User
I think there is merit to it for sure. Lemieux’s size and skill will be perfect in any time period and for sure only helps. His IQ was truly an underrated aspect of his game. For forwards I’ve seen I’d put him probably second to Gretzky in that regard which is super impressive. In my opinion Gretzky’s Suter aftermath is what really accelerated his “bad” aging. When you no longer can play your game and be the best even strength guy ever (89-91 he was still unbelievable even strength per full season)that makes it worse than it should have been. He essentially lost all even strength production that was the difference between 163 and 121 from ‘91 to ‘92. He was never the same even strength after that. His playmaking was there no matter what. He still had the most total points in the 90s as well as assists even as a shell of his former self with way worse supporting casts (even though Lemieux was the best per game in the 90s with less overall games). I feel like if Lemieux and Gretzky play at their best in the 90s or now (really whenever) I do think Gretzky would outscore him but I don’t think you are crazy for thinking the opposite. For me Gretzky being so good at even strength (and as good at converting powerplays despite far less opportunities) tells me that this would be the case. Lemieux’s raw skill and size could see him perhaps having more goals though although I think that would be tight. Your opinion is fair though no doubt. I understand it.
Last edited:
TheStatican
Registered User
- Mar 14, 2012
- 1,737
- 1,516
That depends on what your comparing the numbers to. As a percentage of his own totals they may not seem significant but relative to Lemieux's, specifically his 92-93 season, they are quite informative.
Here's how many points they scored in the last few minutes of the third period in their top seasons:
| WG 81-82 | WG 82-83 | WG 83-84 | WG 84-85 | WG 85-86 | WG 86-87 | ML 87-88 | ML 88-89 | ML 92-93 | ML 95-96 | |
3rd last 10 min | 45 | 35 | 41 | 44 | 39 | 38 | 22 | 37 | 22 | 28 | |
3rd last 5 min | 30 | 19 | 26 | 24 | 22 | 24 | 11 | 22 | 10 | 11 | |
3rdlast 2.5 min | 15 | 12 | 18 | 10 | 19 | 15 | 7 | 17 | 7 | 5 |
Here's the scoring rate of those totals when extrapolated to 60 mins:
| WG 81-82 | WG 82-83 | WG 83-84 | WG 84-85 | WG 85-86 | WG 86-87 | ML 87-88 | ML 88-89 | ML 92-93 | ML 95-96 | |
3rd last 10 min | 3.38 | 2.63 | 3.32 | 3.30 | 2.93 | 2.89 | 1.71 | 3.00 | 2.24 | 2.39 | |
3rd last 5 min | 4.50 | 2.85 | 4.22 | 3.60 | 3.30 | 3.65 | 1.71 | 3.57 | 2.03 | 1.88 | |
3rd last 2:30 min | 4.50 | 3.60 | 5.84 | 3.00 | 5.70 | 4.56 | 2.18 | 5.51 | 2.85 | 1.71 |
To be sure scoring goes up for everyone late in the 3rd largely due to empty net goals, but not normally to THAT extent. As great as Gretzky was, in no way shape or form is scoring at a rate of 5.7 points per game sustainable over a prolong period of time(obviously), in no other period of his game time were such elevated scoring rates seen which indicates something unusual is happening here.
Here's the deviations from the norm, the norm being their expected scoring rate based on their seasonal scoring rate:
| WG 81-82 | WG 82-83 | WG 83-84 | WG 84-85 | WG 85-86 | WG 86-87 | ML 88-89 | ML 92-93 | ML 95-96 | ||
| 3rd last 10 mins | 129% | 108% | 122% | 128% | 112% | 126% | 114% | 84% | 107% | |
| 3rd last 5 mins | 172% | 118% | 155% | 140% | 126% | 159% | 135% | 77% | 84% | |
| 3rd last 2:30 | 172% | 148% | 215% | 117% | 217% | 199% | 209% | 107% | 76% |
Gretzky scored at rates close to or more than double his seasonal averages in the final few minutes of games, with the sole exception of 83-84. Only in 88-89 did Lemieux do the same.
Some might say, well those numbers just go to show how extremely clutch Gretzky was. I'm certainly not about to sit here and argue that he wasn't clutch - his playoff performances speak for themselves. But when it comes to those elevated late 3rd period scoring totals a big chunk of them absolutely did in fact come in blowout situations.
Blowout points:
| WG 81-82 | WG 82-83 | WG 83-84 | WG 84-85 | WG 85-86 | WG 86-87 | ML 88-89 | ML 92-93 | ML 95-96 | ||
| 3rd last 10 mins | 21 | 13 | 22 | 8 | 15 | 12 | 12 | 9 | 8 | |
| 3rd last 5 mins | 19 | 9 | 16 | 5 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 3 | 5 | |
| 3rd last 2:30 | 9 | 6 | 13 | 4 | 12 | 9 | 8 | 1 | 3 | |
| final minute | 7 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 3 |
These totals were defined by the following parameters:
In the top two seasons which are most commonly seen as their best; '84 Gretz, '93 Lemieux, Gretzky was only able to come out ahead on a PPG basis thanks to grabbing 18 points in the final 150 seconds of games. In fact all 18 of those points came after 17:55 of the third - that's 18 in the final 126 seconds, a PPG of 6.95, 12 of those came in the final minute - a PPG rate of 9.73! If these points were game changing that's one thing but most of them were not.
Lemieux meanwhile had just 7 points in the final 150 seconds of games in 92-93, which equates to a PPG of 2.80, more or less equal to his seasonal average. And despite only having 7 points to Gretzky's 18, more of them were meaningful. He scored the insurance goal in a game against the Rangers and assisted on the game-tying goal in a game against the Devils. Additionally three of the other five were with the team up by a pair but with still around a minute and a half left in the game time. Only one was a stat pad - scoring an empty netter while up by two with 9 seconds left.
PPG at specific game minutes(cumulative to that point) and the resulting 80-game pace:
| WG 81-82 | WG 82-83 | WG 83-84 | WG 84-85 | WG 85-86 | WG 86-87 | ML 88-89 | ML 92-93 | ML 92-93 | ||
| up to 40 mins | 1.58 | 1.56 | 1.89 | 1.64 | 1.78 | 1.48 | 1.64 | 1.98 | 1.51 | |
| up to 50 mins | 2.09 | 2.01 | 2.22 | 2.05 | 2.20 | 1.84 | 2.13 | 2.30 | 1.90 | |
| up to 55 mins | 2.28 | 2.21 | 2.42 | 2.30 | 2.41 | 2.01 | 2.33 | 2.50 | 2.14 | |
| up to 57:30 | 2.46 | 2.30 | 2.53 | 2.48 | 2.45 | 2.13 | 2.39 | 2.55 | 2.23 | |
| up to 40 mins | 189 | 187.5 | 227 | 196.5 | 213 | 178 | 197 | 238 | 182 | |
| up to 50 min | 200 | 193 | 213 | 197 | 211 | 176 | 205 | 221 | 182 | |
| up to 55 min | 198.5 | 193 | 211 | 201 | 210.5 | 176 | 203 | 218 | 187 | |
| up to 57:30 | 206 | 192 | 211 | 207 | 204.5 | 177.5 | 200 | 213 | 186 |
Up to the 57:30 minute of game time Gretzky had 185 points in 74 games in 1983-84. If he continued to score at his normal pace he would have ended with 193 pts in regulation time, a 2.61 ppg.
Up to the 57:30 minute of game time Lemieux had 151 points in 60 games in 1992-93. If he continued to score at his expected pace he would have ended with 157/158 pts and a 2.63 ppg. Really a 2.66 ppg since he was only available for 59 games and one period of game time, as how he didn't play past the 1st period in his 40th game against the Bruins.
Heck Lemieux '93 was pacing higher than Gretzky '84 all the way through until the final minute:
It's only thanks to these specific circumstances that Gretzky came out ahead:
| Gm# | Date | Opp | Score | Time | Details |
| 4 | 1983-10-12 | DET | 7 to 3 | 19:44 | Assists on a goal by Hunter to make it 8 to 3 the Oilers score twice with less than 40 seconds left in what was already a very easy win against a bad team |
| 6 | 1983-10-16 | CGY | 4 to 1 | 19:07 | Scores making it 5 to 1 |
| 15 | 1983-11-06 | WIN | 7 to 5 | 19:53 | Up by two scores empty net goal making it 8 to 5, with just 7 seconds left |
| 17 | 1983-11-09 | WSH | 6 to 4 | 19:04 | Assists on a goal by Anderson making it 7 to 4 after already having assisted on the insurance marker just shortly before |
| 18 | 1983-11-12 | DET | 6 to 3 | 19:16 | Scores making it 7 to 3 with only about 40 seconds left |
| 20 | 1983-11-18 | BUF | 6 to 0 | 19:28 | Assists on goal by Kurri to make it 7 to 0 with a half minute left in the game lol |
| 21 | 1983-11-19 | NJ | 12 to 4 | 18:05 | Not in the final minute but this is a particularly egregious example. Up by 8 goals with less than 2 minutes left in a game against by far the worst team in the league the 2-18-0 Devils and guess who still out there looking to score... |
| 35 | 1983-12-21 | WIN | 6 to 4 | 19:41 | Scores an empty net goal to make it 7 to 4 with less than 20 seconds left |
| 38 | 1983-12-28 | VAN | 4 to 3 | 19:06 | Assists on an empty net goal by Kurri to make it 4 to 2 |
| 42 | 1984-01-07 | HAR | 4 to 3 | 19:17 | Scores an empty net goal to make it 5 to 3, playing 40 minutes chasing after goal number 50, this was not counted amongst his stat padding totals but he's obviously just chasing individual glory here |
| 44 | 1984-01-11 | CBH | 4 to 3 | 19:58 | Scores empty net goal with a mere 2 seconds left |
| 50 | 1984-01-25 | VAN | 5 to 4 | 19:38 | Scores empty net goal with 22 seconds left in game |
| 79 | 1984-03-27 | CGY | 8 to 2 | 19:03 | Scores to make it 9 to 2 with less than 60 seconds left in a game, lol |
For comparison, here's the exhaustive list of Lemieux's points in the final minute of games in '93:
| Gm | Date | Opp | Score | Time | Details |
| 26 | 1992-11-28 | WSH | 4 to 3 | 19:50 | Scores empty net goal with 10 seconds remaining |
| 56 | 1993-04-04 | NJ | 4 to 2 | 19:51 | Scores empty net goal with 9 seconds remaining |
Compared to just about everyone else and nearly every other season Gretzky's blowout point totals doesn't change a single thing. But compared to Lemieux's 92-93 season it makes ALL the difference.
WalterLundy
Registered User
Insanely detailed and impressive dive here as always. Not everyone may come away convinced on these things but your effort is truly incredible and commendable. Have to give you credit. Question though. The 14 extra games where WG’s pace drops is where my mind goes. What about if you take Gretzky’s 3 ppg first 57 games and where Lemieux’s ppg peaked this year (after game 58)? Or you can just take his full 60 game sample. Just curious about that because longer seasons cause things to dip.
Last edited:
KevinFinnerty
I bomb atomically...
- Aug 24, 2011
- 28,939
- 14,046
Orr's best season he was 6th in the league in goals and 1st in points. The league was much different then but still, as a defenseman that's an insane level of dominance.
