Malkin in '06 WJC = Gretzky in '81 Canada Cup

[Bloggins]

that's because there's only so much skill a player can have. there's no way gretzky could have been able to have some superhuman ability to get 5pts a night these days. the man was ahead of his time and that's all

OK, I understand. Last night still really stings, you're in mourning and need sleep. Best be off now cuz you're getting real nutty.

 

[Zine]

my assertion is that if gretzky grew up in this era, with all we have now, he would be top of the league good, kovalchuk/jagr/foppa good....but not legendary

that aside, i havn't slept in something like 48 hours and havn't eaten anything in 24....so maybe i'm not making my point as clear as i couold

He would have been legendary, but not AS legendary.
Gretz would have been the best player in the league, but he wouldn't be outscoring the next highest point getter by 50+ points like he did in the '80s.

 

[Digger12]

my assertion is that if gretzky grew up in this era, with all we have now, he would be top of the league good, kovalchuk/jagr/foppa good....but not legendary

You could be right, you could be wrong. Impossible to say for certain.

 

[time]

then fine, malkin will be as good as gretzky in terms of skill. kovalchuk, jagr, heatley, crosby, ovechkin, etc. are all about as good as him too

the only thing separating these players from him is his fortunate timing

other than that, theres no comparison. malkin wont be the next gretzky, i'm not the one who originally stated it in this thread anyway. blahblah blah who cares

Yah, well Gretzky is a putz compared to Frank McGee and Joe Malone -- now those were Malkin-worthy numbers!

 

[John Agar]

Malkin McFly...



Comparing todays players versus yester-year's is a silly game and irrelevant in what is real today.

Malkin is a great young prospect. Until he is in the NHL and he has shown us what he can do, he will remain just another great prospect.

Try and stay with reality guys.

 

[time]

Comparing todays players versus yester-year's is a silly game and irrelevant in what is real today.

Malkin is a great young prospect. Until he is in the NHL and he has shown us what he can do, he will remain just another great prospect.

Try and stay with reality guys.

I'm just saying if Gretzky had played with a rover on the outdoor ice against a team of gold miners from Dawson City would he have scored 14 goals? It's clear that Malkin would have done at least that (and Kessel would have assisted on all of them).

And how fair is it that McGee only had one eye? Why, if he had two eyes and his uncle hadn't been asassinated by Fenians, then the American ref might have gone upstairs in time for the video review and the CCCP would in fact have actually won the '72 series and Brian Lawton would be vindicated as an underappreciated first overall pick. (Oh, and the Leafs might have won the Cup).

It all seems pretty clear to me.

 

[jcorb58]

You all know it's true as much as it pains you to accept. The goaltending and D was so piss poor back then that his skill level just wouldn't translate to similar numbers in this new (albiet "high scoring" era.

Ya and i guess the great Valeri Kharlomov couldnt either because he played back in the crappy 70s . Montreals team in 76 was every bit as good as Red Army. Goalies had to accually have more skill because they didnt completely cover the net with pads. I have been very objective giving the russian teams their due. I have never read such poor sportsmanship that you and siberian have littered this thread with. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. And i guess that would make tretriak a pretty lousy goalie now also. Great players from all nationalities would be great no matter what period of time or league they play in. Next yr beat our boys by 5 goals and you wont need the excuses. Your acting like a 10 yr old kid.

 

[jcorb58]

Dude, take a breath, think about all that you've said. It hurts to have your team lose. I remember how I felt after the Yanks snuck one by us two years ago.

But this "Gretzky's not so good" or "Malkin = Gretzky" stuff? Why that's just crazy talk. Take a long bath -- dream about the Olympics (Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovachuk, Datsyuk, etc...). See, there's always another game.

That's why we shake hands at the end.

AMEN brother. The russians have one hell of a team they can ice for the olympics.
Lets hope if they dont get gold we dont get all this unnessessiary whining. I seen a few non calls in the USA game against russia and i havent read any excuses from the Americans. If this is NA vs Europe i would love to except that challenge. Our fans supported the russians over our southern brothers more for political reasons. I really dont think the American ref felt he owed us anything. Every year the USA gets harder and harder to beat so if you guys feel we are conspiring to beat the europeans it would be interesting to have a NA vs Europe tournament.

 

[David]

that's because there's only so much skill a player can have. there's no way gretzky could have been able to have some superhuman ability to get 5pts a night these days. the man was ahead of his time and that's all

Clearly you don't know who Wayne Gretzky is. Try going over to the history boards and doing some research.

 

[David]

He would have been legendary, but not AS legendary.
Gretz would have been the best player in the league, but he wouldn't be outscoring the next highest point getter by 50+ points like he did in the '80s.

Sorry but even YOU need to go over to the history boards and do some research on the Wayner. This topic has been covered more times than I can remember.

 

[Den]

IMO, Malkin is quite overated. IMO, there are 5-10 RSL players better than him and quite a few Russian NHLers.....

 

[Lessy]

In the two games I saw Russia play (the semifinal and final games) Malkin dominated and in particular against the Americans in the semis. He was so dangerous offensively and with that size... he's listed on some sites at 6'3" and 180 pounds, well he is much much bigger than that and I would think closer to 6'5" and maybe 220 pounds with a humongous wingspan. He is a sensational talent no question and should definitely be in the NHL right now however to compare him to Gretzky's performance... I think it's difficult and a little farfetch'd.

 

[VanIslander]

In the two games I saw Russia play (the semifinal and final games) Malkin dominated and in particular against the Americans in the semis. He was so dangerous offensively and with that size... he's listed on some sites at 6'3" and 180 pounds, well he is much much bigger than that and I would think closer to 6'5" and maybe 220 pounds with a humongous wingspan. He is a sensational talent no question and should definitely be in the NHL right now however to compare him to Gretzky's performance... I think it's difficult and a little farfetch'd.

This thread was NOT meant to compare the talent level of Malkin with the talent level of Gretzky.

An analogy is only supposed to be taken so far.

Those who think this thread is about trying to say Malkin is the next Gretz need to read more carefully.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Each dominated the tourney until the Canadian-Russian final, then each was SHUTDOWN in that game.

1981 Canada Cup for Gretzky.
2006 World Junior Championships for Malkin.

An interesting parallel that undermines any attempt to say Malkin's lack of production is an indication of his talent or future success.

..

 

[VanIslander]

just as..... Gretzky did nothing in the canada-russia final even though the 20 year old was phenomenal in earlier games that tourney

so did.... Malkin do nothing in the canada-russia even though the near-20 year old was phenomenal in earlier games in this tourney

that's the parallel !!!!!!

and did the nonperformance in the final prove at all relevant to Gretzky's career potential or success int he future big games.... NO

and so the nonperformance in the final DOESN'T prove relevant to Malkin's career potential or success in the future big games

...

 

[Ogopogo*]

You can't look at Gretzkys point totals in the WJHC either because if you put Malkin in a Delorean and shot him back to the 70s, Malkin could easily get those kind of numbers against the weaker competition of the past.

If Malkin played in the 70s, he would not have the advantages of having evolved into a 2000s hockey player. He would be shorter, smaller, slower and have the same equipment and coaching of any 70s player.

How would he have done then? Well, considering Gretzky was 16 when he led the tournament in scoring and Malkin is 19 and tied for 2nd, Gretzky was by far the better junior.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Gretzky didn't have to skills to compete in todays NHL when the goalies didn't just fall over when a snap shot was taking from the hash marks.

Let me guess, you are in the 16-24 demographic.

 

[Ogopogo*]

I never once said Malkin would ever be as good as Gretzky. I doubt anyone ever will because Gretzkys numbers were a matter of absolute luck, his timing to enter the league was perfect.


and to the other who said he put up amazing numbers from the mid to late 90s....he put up Joe Sakic numbers in that period. If he was putting 120pt seasons up in the defensive era i'd be singing a different tune.

i still say that if you put a guy like rick nash or any modern day sniper back to the 80s when goalies would fall on their behinds at the sight of a puck, then they'd easily put up 90 goal seasons. early on in this very season simon gagne was on pace for a 90+ goal season so such numbers are not impossible, just not very likely as it requires more consistancy. his 120+pt seasons back then were good but look at the scoring chart right now, quite a few players are on pace for over 120pts and none of them are of the gretzky status.

and in regards to the 80s being a "defensive era", that still means nothing as gretzky was ahead of his time in terms of skill. if he was playing in this era he'd probably be up in the upper echelon of players, but not have any 200pt seasons or be breaking any goal scoring records.

in summar: gretzky's numbers were a matter of luck/fate, not an unmatched amount of skill



and to the guy who thinks i'm some disgrunted russian fan....what?? sure, i like the russians and I root for russia because i like more russian players than i do canadains, but it's not like i'm russian or anything. i'm from toronto and am just a fan of them, and that has no bearing on my views of gretzky. my favorite player is canadian (lemieux) and heck, i've rooted for team canada on plenty of occasions. just not this tournament. sheesh.

Let me help you understand:

If Gretzky was in his prime during the 2003-04 season, he would have scored 140 points. The league leader was Martin St. Louis at 94.

Does that give you an idea of Gretzky's dominance? Of course he would not have hit 200 pts in the large goalie equipment, clutching and grabbing era. But, he would still have dominated the league and won scoring titles by a WIDE margin.

He would have been the best in any era.

 

[helicecopter]

IMO, Malkin is quite overated. IMO, there are 5-10 RSL players better than him and quite a few Russian NHLers.....

Please, wouldn't you mind to provide me with the 5-10 RSL players that are better than Malkin? I know one of them would be Sushinsky (lol), but i can't wait for the others.

Kharitonov?
Antipov?
Morozov?
Zonovjev??
Semin??

 

[millions]

Fairly heated debate...with some people who obviously know thier history.

Seems like a "my dads player is better than your dads player" argument or some iteration of that. I have to agree that it is difficult, if not absurd to compare. There are the special players like Orr and Gretzky that defy comparison (and if Lemeiux had a full career, he would be there as well). These are people of 'recent' golden years that played in a place that will never be replayed or duplicated as well as men who are lost in the history of the NHL that were equally great in their times.

Bring up competition level, quality of equipment, and heart (the biggest intangible). The old guys get that in my opinion in that hockey was just a high class (yet extremely tough) blue collar job.

I don't like where professional sports are going in the flake department. Results are the only litmus test and in that, you cannot deny the Gretzkys, nor the Malones, (and have to acknowledge Mario) for that matter. Each were the pinnacle (by a big stretch).

Instead of comparisons, just understand what each accomplished in their own arenas. Those who are are on their way have enough pressure...lets just let them play.

BTW, I was absolutley privelidged to watch Gretzky in his younger and best years (as well as the supporting cast). I cannot sully that experience by 'dreaming' what it would be like to watch him in other eras. Can't happen...just enjoy the history.

My biggerst regret though is that just before the Oiler joined The NHL, both Ken Dryden and Bobby Orr retired. Now that would have been a treat to see...

 

[millions]

Crap..lost my intital point (see above).

Re:the Gretzky comparison

I did not see the Canada-Russia Jr. final (I'm sure it was in Eastern Can). I was fortunate enough to see some of the 1981 Canada Cup. I was only 11 years old at this time, and I pulled myself at halftime in my atom football game as I "had" to go see the round robin games of Finland/Sweden and Canada/Russia. Coolest jerseys (the old Canada Cup style). Needless to say, I never missed a practice in my life after that...

Anyhow, Canada got their *** kicked in that game, and obviously did again in the final. That goes to show really what the Canada/Russia level was at that time. The russians were VERY good. If one wishes to look at the talent, look at what started coming to the NHL not too long after that.

I understand the need for comparison to justify worth in a player, and believe me, I have been proven wrong by the pundits. One only has to look at Crosby, Ovechkin, and in another venue, Labron James (however much I hate basketball). I never said they would fail, but just waited for them to succeed.

As for Malkin, let watch and enjoy...