OT: Generational Players

[Lafleurs Guy]

You are mistaking the 80's for the "Dead Puck Era".

McDavid would feast on post 80's post expansion defencemen who could barely skate.

They don’t have to skate when they can just drape themselves all over you. Dead puck era or not. Look at Kaspiritis in ‘93. That wasn’t the dead puck era and the NHL let him mug Lemieux for the entire series. That never should’ve been allowed.

While Lemieux would still be amazing he would also have to deal with a level of consistently big, strong, fast and skilled players defending against him.

Take a look at his first shift in his first NHL game. He made Ray Bourque look like a clown annd scored. And he did it more than once in his career.

It's not the just the exceptional players that are so impressive in the current NHL, it's the depth of talent that is so much better than anything post expansion. It's a MUCH harder league to separate yourself in.

It’s a faster league but a big part of that is the rules. No obstruction and no red line. Lemieux would feast on that.

 

[Silky Johnson]

They don’t have to skate when they can just drape themselves all over you. Dead puck era or not. Look at Kaspiritis in ‘93. That wasn’t the dead puck era and the NHL let him mug Lemieux for the entire series. That never should’ve been allowed.

Take a look at his first shift in his first NHL game. He made Ray Bourque look like a clown annd scored. And he did it more than once in his career.

It’s a faster league but a big part of that is the rules. No obstruction and no red line. Lemieux would feast on that.

There is no doubt that Lemieux is amazing and would be a star in any era. You very much underestimate how much the depth of the league has improved and how much more skill there now is.

The period between expansion and the dead puck era makes for about 90% of the top 50 point season my a player of all time.

McDavid is an outliers in that he has but up multiple top 50 seasons out of that era. To think he wouldn't skate circles around 80 era expansion defencemen, who needed training wheels on their skates, is ridiculous. Smaller, slower, less skiled players where able to excel, why wouldn't he?

Conversely, Lemieux never had to face the depth of talent that McDavid faced. He would still be a generational talent but his numbers would drop, so would Gretzky's.

 

[DAChampion]

You are mistaking the 80's for the "Dead Puck Era".

McDavid would feast on post 80's post expansion defencemen who could barely skate.

While Lemieux would still be amazing he would also have to deal with a level of consistently big, strong, fast and skilled players defending against him.

It's not the just the exceptional players that are so impressive in the current NHL, it's the depth of talent that is so much better than anything post expansion. It's a MUCH harder league to separate yourself in.

In 2016 (recent enough) a 44 year-old Jaromir Jagr got 66 points in 79 games. How would a 24 year old Jagr have done then?

 

[CHwest]

When comparing players, there will always be differences in environment. Wooden sticks, fitnes, goalie equipment… and on the whole today’s athletes are better. But that doesn’t mean that elite players from the past wouldn’t be elite today.

Lemieux and Greatzlynwould still be the best players in the league.

I believe Lemieux would certainly hold his own, I don't believe Gretzky would fair as well (in the sense of being the best in the league), especially in the goal scoring dept. A lot of his goals were scored off the rush with a slap shot, that doesn't happen anymore, goalies are to good and players are not given that time any more.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

There is no doubt that Lemieux is amazing and would be a star in any era. You very much underestimate how much the depth of the league has improved and how much more skill there now is.

The period between expansion and the dead puck era makes for about 90% of the top 50 point season my a player of all time.

McDavid is an outliers in that he has but up multiple top 50 seasons out of that era. To think he wouldn't skate circles around 80 era expansion defencemen, who needed training wheels on their skates, is ridiculous. Smaller, slower, less skiled players where able to excel, why wouldn't he?

Conversely, Lemieux never had to face the depth of talent that McDavid faced. He would still be a generational talent but his numbers would drop, so would Gretzky's.

I’m sorry but I completely disagree. At age 43 Jagr put up 66 points in 79 games on an unimpressive roster. No those aren’t dominant numbers but it was good for 22nd in the league. And that was with a dip in league scoring. Age 43! And that in itself was a low scoring era. It’s much better today.

You think he wouldn’t have led the league at 25? You think prime Mario wouldn’t have absolutely crushed that?

We have the benefit of getting a glimpse of what Lemieux could do as an old man under the new rules. He smashed the league. Imagine him in his prime.

He would happily take the trade off in opposition quality if it meant no obstruction and no red line. He would be unstoppable.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I believe Lemieux would certainly hold his own, I don't believe Gretzky would fair as well (in the sense of being the best in the league), especially in the goal scoring dept. A lot of his goals were scored off the rush with a slap shot, that doesn't happen anymore, goalies are to good and players are not given that time any more.

Gretzky would adjust though. He knew the slapshot would work. If it stopped working he’d find another way to score. He’s the smartest player who ever played.

 

[crosbyshow]

I believe Lemieux would certainly hold his own, I don't believe Gretzky would fair as well (in the sense of being the best in the league), especially in the goal scoring dept. A lot of his goals were scored off the rush with a slap shot, that doesn't happen anymore, goalies are to good and players are not given that time any more.

Lool at my nickname so you will guess that my favorite player today is Crosby.


But you know what..;

I have seen Gretz's prime and...
Crosby' s vision and IQ...is nowhere near 99's IQ and vision.

In fact not even in the same league and I am dead serious.

Wayne was a chess master on the ice.

Also look at what a very old Jagr did a few years ago in the NHL.....

Jagr was an absolute force in the 90s a real phenom...and you know what.....Jagr in his prime was nowhere near Lemieux's prime....actually not even close

A 23 years old injury free ( 1988-89) version of Lemieux in todays league with today's stick and conditionning....he would destroy the league as well.

 

[DAChampion]

It's interesting that nobody's able to address the point that each of Gretzky, Lemieux, Jagr, Crosby, Ovechkin, (etc, etc, etc, etc) was or is able to go ppg performance at age 40 or so.

Those performances argue against the league improving in quality over time.

Alexander Ovechkin has 26 goals and 43 points in 39 games ... And he's 39 years old. His body is not what it was. He's accumulated injuries and wear and tear and he's slower, his reflexes and reaction time are slower. And he's playing elite at age 39. Ultimately that refutes the point that the league is vastly stronger today than it was in 2005-2010. What would a 23 year old Ovechkin produce in this league?

I wonder if perhaps the talent pool was actually deeper back then. It was much more common in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s for children to obsess over sport. It wasn't restricted to the upper middle class learning sport as a vocation. So yes the equipment wasn't as good, but the talent pool was broader and deeper.

 

[Silky Johnson]

In 2016 (recent enough) a 44 year-old Jaromir Jagr got 66 points in 79 games. How would a 24 year old Jagr have done then?

Are you saying despite that there is a larger player pool relative to the number of teams hockey has not gotten deeper?

Are you saying that modern training and development techniques are creating less separation in elite athletes in all sports except hockey?

Are you suggesting that hockey against all odds has less depth and talent?

Or maybe it's that you can only (edit) find outlier statistics in any situation that run counter to overall trends.

I’m sorry but I completely disagree. At age 43 Jagr put up 66 points in 79 games on an unimpressive roster. No those aren’t dominant numbers but it was good for 22nd in the league. And that was with a dip in league scoring. Age 43! And that in itself was a low scoring era. It’s much better today.

You think he wouldn’t have led the league at 25? You think prime Mario wouldn’t have absolutely crushed that?

We have the benefit of getting a glimpse of what Lemieux could do as an old man under the new rules. He smashed the league. Imagine him in his prime.

He would happily take the trade off in opposition quality if it meant no obstruction and no red line. He would be unstoppable.

See above.

The league is better now in terms of depth and talent - it's pretty much objectively true.

Lemieux would do worse in a deeper league. McDavid would do better is a less deep and talented league.

Your argument is basically feelings and anecdotal examples that run contrary to universal trends.

In any case, this is boring and I am done.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Are you saying despite that there is a larger player pool relative to the number of teams hockey has not gotten deeper?

Are you saying that modern training and development techniques are creating less separation in elite athletes in all sports except hockey?

Are you suggesting that hockey against all odds has less depth and talent?

I'm saying that Mario Lemieux was an exceptional player. I'm saying that he was at a tremendous disadvantage due to the rules that existed at the time and with the new rule changes he'd be a far more effective player.

The only way to limit him was to clutch, grab and tackle him. With that no longer being an option, he wojuld absolutely dominate this league.

Yes, it's a different league. Yes, it's a different talent pool. But a big reason the game is so much faster is because the rule changes have allowed players to skate uninhindered relative to the way the game used to be played.

Or maybe it's that you can find outlier statistics in any situation that run counter to overall trends.

I can.

See Mario Lemieux in 2001-2003. A 38 year old man who'd been retired for years comes back and dominates the league. In 2001 he came back and paced at 150 points per 82. Those are prime Connor McDavid numbers. Prime Steve Yzerman numbers.

If that's not an outlier, I don't know what is.

 

[Silky Johnson]

I'm saying that Mario Lemieux was an exceptional player. I'm saying that he was at a tremendous disadvantage due to the rules that existed at the time and with the new rule changes he'd be a far more effective player.

The only way to limit him was to clutch, grab and tackle him. With that no longer being an option, he wojuld absolutely dominate this league.

Yes, it's a different league. Yes, it's a different talent pool. But a big reason the game is so much faster is because the rule changes have allowed players to skate uninhindered relative to the way the game used to be played.

I can.

See Mario Lemieux in 2003. A 38 year old man who'd been retired for years comes back and dominates the league.

If that's not an outlier, I don't know what is.

Yes. It's an outlier. My point exactly.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Yes. It's an outlier. My point exactly.

Lemieux is an outlier... so is Gretzky. They were always outliers.

We're talking about how they'd do vs today's league. They'd destroy it.

Anything else your talking about has nothing to do with what I've been saying.

 

[Silky Johnson]

Lemieux is an outlier... so is Gretzky.

We're talking about how they'd do vs today's league. They'd destroy it.

Anything else your talking about has nothing to do with what I've been saying.

No. The outlier seasons do not disprove the league being MUCH deeper and talented.

They would do worse in a much better league. McDavid would do better in a worse league.

You can argue style but that's just conjecture. Clutch and grab may not be the way to slow down Lemieux, maybe systems, team speed and defensive talent are. Who knows.

Bernie Nichols put up 150pts in the 80's being smaller, slower and much less talented than McDavid.

Paul Kariya had 100+ points season while being slower, smaller and weaker than McDavid.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Btw,

For folks who are wondering how much top end speed has changed... it doesn't seem to have changed by much in terms of the top players. Mike Gartner's lap record lasted over a decade before it was slightly beaten. Dylan Larkin beat it after that but - according to him - he had an unfair advantage in terms of being able to pick up speed before the timing.

The game itself though is a lot faster. Why? In big part because of the no red line, no obstruction... it's allowed players to play a much faster game.

Breaking Speed Limits - TSN.ca

Speed is the engine of the game – it always has been – but the torrid pace of today’s NHL has spurred a natural evolution process, Frank Seravalli and Steve Dryden write.

www.tsn.ca

Jagr on the sate of the game:
“If somebody told me I’ve slowed down, well, yes, relative to everyone else,” Jaromir Jagr said. “I didn’t slow down. Everyone else just got a lot quicker. I’m a lot quicker now than I was then. Trust me. I’ve watched the tapes. I’ve looked at the game. The league is just a lot quicker.”

Think about it. Players can skate at top speed unimpeded through the zone. The game didn't used to work that way. Conditioning is eons better than in the 70s (when there was no conditioning) but the 80s and 90s were a lot better conditioning wise. Guys like Sakic, Yzerman, Gretzky and especially Lemieux would have a lot more room to operate today. PP faceoffs are in the opposing zone too...

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

No. The outlier seasons do not disprove the league being MUCH deeper and talented.

They would do worse in a much better league. McDavid would do better in a worse league.

You can argue style but that's just conjecture. Clutch and grab may not be the way to slow down Lemieux, maybe systems, team speed and defensive talent are. Who knows.

Bernie Nichols put up 150pts in the 80's being smaller, slower and much less talented than McDavid.

Paul Kariya had 100+ points season while being slower, smaller and weaker than McDavid.

We're talking about a completely different game. A game that favours offense a lot more than the old rules used to. Players can freewheel now in a way they never could before. McDavid's speed would be partially negated by guys hanging off of him - just like they did with Lemieux. Go back and watch some old tapes of Kaspiritis on Lemieux in that 93 series. Imagine that happening today. Imagine if they were allowed to do that with McDavid... Guys used to have to hold up at the red line, not anymore. Now you get guys going top speed all the time.

There's a reason Lemieux scored at a 150 point pace when he came back, the rules were totally different. Even as an old man he was able to dominate despite all the injuries, despite the years off... Nobody was allowed to jump on his back anymore.

And take a look at that link I provided for you. Everyone agrees its a faster game overall. But the top players back then are skating at similar speeds to top players today. It's not a massive difference. Yeah, you could take advantage of slower players but those slower players were on the ice because they were allowed to tackle people.

You mention Paul Kariya... he's another guy that would be infinitely better now. He was barely a 50 goal guy back then. Now he'd score 60+. Not only that, he'd be far less likely to have had the concussion problems he did. That's another thing that's changed, you're not allowed to give Scott Stevens type hits. Bernie Nichols never put up those kinds of points until Gretzky joined his team.

I appreciate what you're saying but you're kind of missing the point a bit in assuming today's player is better. They're not really 'better' they're a different profile of player. A guy like Craig Ludwig for example was an extremely effective defensive blueliner. He'd just wrap guys up and obstruct the crap out of them. You're right, he wouldn't be in the league today but in large part that's because he wouldn't be allowed to do what he was good at. That kind of player is gone. But if the rule changed back tomorrow, then you'd see a lot more Craig Ludwigs in the league right away.