Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 75,416
- 45,465
Imagine Craig Janney x 10000. That's how good he was.
I don't think that does Gretzky Justice.
It is so hard to compare him to anyone, his style of play was so unique. He is not even IMO comparable to Oates, Mario, H. Sedin. He was so different than everyone else.
That's because his insane goal scoring (fastest to 400, fastest to 500, fastest to 600, fastest to 700, fastest to 800, and only one to 894) was mostly a function of his playmaking. It wasn't really the result of his wrist shot, his slapshot, or any other traditional goal scorer's weapon (although he certainly had many of these weapons to help him execute). His playmaking is what got him the most goals ever, just as much as it got him the most assists ever. Someone once said, "Hockey is geometry, and Gretzky understands this geometry better than anyone else in the history of hockey." Therefore his goal scoring was the result of his understanding of this geometry combined with the physical skills necessary to excecute that understanding.This is really the essense of why Gretzky was so hard to understand. With everyone else you mention, they had a physical skillset that was so elite, it was very difficult to stop. But it was still just 1 guy. With Gretzky, it wasn't just him. He was dangerous with the puck, without the puck; it just didn't matter. No player in history was better at using their teammates so such great effect. And unlike traditional playmakers, he could also score 92 goals in a season, 50 in 39 games, 894 career goals, and all the other goal scoring records and milestones he set.
I think the only thing tainted about Gretzky was that the league protected him. It was really a gutless league in that respect. We'll never know how good Gretzky was because he never played by the same rules as everybody else. Also, he embraced this treatment and even demanded it. Really Mickey Mouse!
I actually think Henrik is a decent comparison. If you take his playmaking sense with his brother, but then apply that to basically everyone Gretzky ever played with, you start to get a sense of his playmaking. Of course, that doesn't account for his goal scoring... and the fact that he could do either made him even better at both. You never knew if he was going to shoot or pass, and he was so deadly at each.
I don't think you can really compare Gretzky accurately to any player. And certainly not Sedin. Gretzky's Greatness is rather supernatural. Sure some think Orr was better, but even those people will tell you, that it is much easier to analyze why Orr was great; in contrast to why on earth is that skinny Wayne so great.
I recommend watching Gretzky games. It's the only way to realize how far Wayne is above anyone else in that one aspect of the game that makes him the Great One.
To me, watching Gretzky in the 80s and early-mid 90s was like watching a superhero movie.
I don't really agree that Henrik is a good comparison. Consider: Gretzky at age 37, playing with the likes of Niklas Sundstrum and Adam Graves, was scoring the same number of points Henrik is now in his prime playing with his twin brother. Add to that the physical skill set he had in his prime, and Gretzky's playmaking sense was executable in a way that was vastly superior to Henrik's, twin brother or no twin brother. Gretzky simply has no contemporaries in terms of his geometrical, space time understanding of the game of hockey.I actually think Henrik is a decent comparison. If you take his playmaking sense with his brother, but then apply that to basically everyone Gretzky ever played with, you start to get a sense of his playmaking. Of course, that doesn't account for his goal scoring... and the fact that he could do either made him even better at both. You never knew if he was going to shoot or pass, and he was so deadly at each.
Someone posted a quote about Semenko saying "Don't ever think Gretzky can't see you on the ice." I've got another one. In Kevin Lowe's book(yes, he wrote a book), he mentions how one time around 83 or so, Gretzky mentions how he doesn't like to play the Islanders as much, or struggles with them. Well of course, they're multi-defending champs, with Denis Potvin on the blueline and Bryan Trottier up front. They give everybody fits.
No, that's not it. The Islanders' pants were a very similar blue to that of the Oilers, so Gretzky couldn't as quickly count how many teammates and opponents were around with his quick glance.
The pants? Seriously, are there 3 people who could have done that in the history of the game? I thought I had decent vision on the ice being able to see a teammate from the corner of my eye. There is no bloody way I could have glanced quickly and sized up the numbers for each team in the split second he could.
As an older player in the Dead Puck era he still was top-5 in assists his last five seasons, a 2nd team all-star his final two seasons. THAT was an NHL with lots of hitting, cheapshots, clutching and grabbing.... so many people insist that the game has gotten bigger, that the pace is different, that the league is just much harder.
Would Gretzky still be a generational talent in this league?
I think so. Folks didn't think that Mario could cut it when he came back and he was absolutely incredible. I think Gretz would still dominate.I'm not having a go at him, because I never watched him play except as a very young child, but I will say this; so many people insist that the game has gotten bigger, that the pace is different, that the league is just much harder.
Would Gretzky still be a generational talent in this league?
I don't really agree that Henrik is a good comparison. Consider: Gretzky at age 37, playing with the likes of Niklas Sundstrum and Adam Graves, was scoring the same number of points Henrik is now in his prime playing with his twin brother. Add to that the physical skill set he had in his prime, and Gretzky's playmaking sense was executable in a way that was vastly superior to Henrik's, twin brother or no twin brother. Gretzky simply has no contemporaries in terms of his geometrical, space time understanding of the game of hockey.
Yes, that's true. I see what you're saying now.I didn't mean to imply that Henrik is anywhere near the playmaker Gretzky was, with his brother or without. But Henrik does a lot of the no-look passes to his brother, and they're usually tape to tape. I mostly meant that if you could take a guy with that ability, but apply it to everyone he played with, not just his brother, then add in elite goal scoring abilities on top, you begin to get a sense of what Gretzky was like, only Gretzky was still much better. He obviously has no comparison today and I will probably go to my grave insisting that he was the greatest player of all time. I was simply trying to draw a comparison for the OP, who seemed to be looking someone to relate Gretzky's game and style to.
Yes, that's true. I see what you're saying now.
To answer another poster about Gretzky's 85-86 season where he had 163 assists: In his autobiography, Gretzky said he secretly was trying to achieve 2 assists per game since 84 (if I remember correctly), and did it in 85-86. Even more amazing is he was somehow able to score over 50 goals the same season. Mind boggling really. Someone posted in the other thread that a prime Gretzky would be able to score 60 goals and 190 assists for 250 points on a line with Jari Kurri and Mario Lemieux. As far fetched as that sounds at first, it really isn't when you think about it. Gretzky scored 52 goals and 163 assists without Mario Lemieux afterall. Could Lemieux have given him an extra 8 goals and 27 assists? I would think so. Gretzky was the best ever at getting the most out of great players. Put Gretzky on a great team and put Mario Lemieux on a great team and Gretzky beats Lemieux in scoring 9 times out of 10. Put them both on bad teams, and Lemieux wins in most cases. Gretzky wasn't about individual talent. He was all about exploiting the talent around him, and since hockey is a team game, he's the player I take despite some physical shortcomings vs. Orr and Lemieux.
Gretzky scored 92 goals and 212 points on a BAD TEAM. With rookies and/or journeyman as linemates, before Coffey broke out. I think it is possible Gretzky outscores Mario on a bad team as well.
... The 81-82 Oilers were certainly not a bad team. If you want to talk about the Oilers of 79-80 I'll grant you that, but the 80-81 team was alright and the 81-82 team was good.
Coffey had 89 points as a 20 year old in 81-82. It's safe to say that was his breakout season. Anderson, Messier, and Kurri were all 21 years old and producing well.
What beat the Oilers in the '82 playoffs was their lack of depth, and their over-reliance on their top five players, so you could certainly say they were not a GREAT team - but they were unquestionably good.
I find it interesting that a thread that alludes to Gretzky's "physical" talents finds it difficult to field comments that disagree.
Pom Poms only? Sheesh.....
I noticed you mentioned between 1980-90....and not 91-99.
Why? Perhaps because his physical attributes allowed him to be +/- NEGATIVE six times, on his way to also hold the all-time record of being on the ice witnessing the most scores allowed AGAINST his team?
Now, before you continue to disparage these factual comments I make, please note that I hold Gretzky to be the top offensive player of all-time -- by a wide margin. And he was an absolute magician...including having the ability to erase all his imperfections from the minds of his fans!!!
Everything? Really???
Does your "everything" include essential things such as checking, corner work, sticking up for teammates (or for yourself), playing the "absolute best" defense one can play, etc...?
If not, perhaps "everything" isn't the best word to use in your description.
as I type this, i am watching the 87 Canada Cup, game 2 of the final. virtually everytime 99 touches the puck he makes a scoring chance; he's is creating 4 or 5 chances a shift. Its ridiculous how dangerous he is. He is also surprizingly good at picking the puck possessor's pocket and stripping the puck of guys.
Anyone who wants to understand how special 99 was must watch this game, and forever silence the arguements. Besides 66 and 4, no one is even in his stratasphere.