When Did You Start To Notice A Slip In Gretzky's Game

[The Pale King]

just a random thought here, but as a fan of hockey in general, it's too bad the late 90's Capitals weren't able to land Gretzky somehow. Him with say Bondra + a young Chris Simon to handle the dirty work would have been very entertaining.

Still not enough to get by the Wings in '98, but anything Oates can do...

 

[HabsQC]

when he got traded for the first time. He was dead inside after that

 

[blogofmike]

Gretzky was close enough that had New York actually acquired Sakic to snap home his PP passes and shelter him at ES, or the PP opportunity luck changed (New York had 56 fewer PPO than Pittsburgh, and Gretzky had !:16 less PP time per game than Jagr), Gretzky could have scored 100+ and challenged for the Art Ross.

 

[tazzy19]

Gretzky was close enough that had New York actually acquired Sakic to snap home his PP passes and shelter him at ES, or the PP opportunity luck changed (New York had 56 fewer PPO than Pittsburgh, and Gretzky had !:16 less PP time per game than Jagr), Gretzky could have scored 100+ and challenged for the Art Ross.

Great points, blogofmike. Would Gretzky likely have had these factors going for him had he been playing for Colorado?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Gretzky was close enough that had New York actually acquired Sakic to snap home his PP passes and shelter him at ES, or the PP opportunity luck changed (New York had 56 fewer PPO than Pittsburgh, and Gretzky had !:16 less PP time per game than Jagr), Gretzky could have scored 100+ and challenged for the Art Ross.

That's a lot of what-ifs in Gretky's favor.

Here's one against Gretzky - if Jagr didn't miss 5 games and scored at his 1.3247 PPG pace over a full 82 games, he would have scored 109 points, ballooning his lead over Gretzky from 12 to 19 points. (Gretzky played all 82 games that season himself).

 

[blogofmike]

That's a lot of what-ifs in Gretky's favor.

Here's one against Gretzky - if Jagr didn't miss 5 games and scored at his 1.3247 PPG pace over a full 82 games, he would have scored 109 points, ballooning his lead over Gretzky from 12 to 19 points. (Gretzky played all 82 games that season himself).

One or the other would have done it

Scoring 60 ES points with Sundstrom as Gretzky's main ES linemate seems more impressive than Jagr scoring 64 with Francis as his.

Teemu Selanne gets jobbed too in 1998. He had 67 ES points and lost out because without the injured Paul Kariya, the remaining Ducks were lucky if they could show up with their skates tied on the PP.

 

[Sentinel]

I assume you mean Lafontaine, not Weight. And of course, that team was loaded with big names. That was the 1998-2004 Rangers - loaded with big names who underperformed.

Absolutely. That team should be in Wikipedia for "high payrol that underperforms."

And it's also highly likely that with a better (better performing) roster Gretzky would stick around for a year or two.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

One or the other would have done it

Scoring 60 ES points with Sundstrom as Gretzky's main ES linemate seems more impressive than Jagr scoring 64 with Francis as his.

Teemu Selanne gets jobbed too in 1998. He had 67 ES points and lost out because without the injured Paul Kariya, the remaining Ducks were lucky if they could show up with their skates tied on the PP.

Come on, Jagr proved the very next year that he was the one driving the offense in Pittsburgh, and he scored even more with linemates at least as bad as what Gretzky had in 1998.

Anyway, I'll have to remember how much you guys think linemates affect a player's point totals when the next Gretzky vs Lemieux thread pops up.

 

[tazzy19]

Come on, Jagr proved the very next year that he was the one driving the offense in Pittsburgh, and he scored even more with linemates at least as bad as what Gretzky had in 1998.

Anyway, I'll have to remember how much you guys think linemates affect a player's point totals when the next Gretzky vs Lemieux thread pops up.

You mean like the time Gretzky scored 92 goals when no one else on his team besides Anderson had 90 points, and he scored 107 more points than 2nd place (Glen Anderson) and 123 points more than 3rd place (Paul Coffey)?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You mean like the time Gretzky scored 92 goals when no one else on his team besides Anderson had 90 points, and he scored 107 more points than 2nd place (Glen Anderson) and 123 points more than 3rd place (Paul Coffey)?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

Yes, or like Jagr's 1999 or 2000...

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

You mean like the time Gretzky scored 92 goals when no one else on his team besides Anderson had 90 points, and he scored 107 more points than 2nd place (Glen Anderson) and 123 points more than 3rd place (Paul Coffey)?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

Wasn't that the year Gretz turned Lumley into a 30 goal scorer?

 

[blogofmike]

Come on, Jagr proved the very next year that he was the one driving the offense in Pittsburgh, and he scored even more with linemates at least as bad as what Gretzky had in 1998.

Anyway, I'll have to remember how much you guys think linemates affect a player's point totals when the next Gretzky vs Lemieux thread pops up.

So long as we remember that Lemieux's linemate was a bonus linemate since the other team usually only had 4 skaters

Jagr's 1999 (127-83) was about on par with Dale Hawerchuk's 1988 (121-79) and doesn't quite have the imbalance Gretzky had as late as 1991 (163-91).

Jagr's 1999 was much better than his 1998. 1998 Gretzky would have needed to use time travel and/or a shotgun to catch him in 1999. In 1998, Jagr's performance wasn't as good. Which is why Gretzky or Selanne could have caught him had they had better luck with their environment.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Absolutely. That team should be in Wikipedia for "high payrol that underperforms."

And it's also highly likely that with a better (better performing) roster Gretzky would stick around for a year or two.

The thing is that the NYR as a team fell off the collective cliff from 97-98 when Moose and Buekoboom was done.

The NYR save % went from .915 to .903 which simply is devastating for any team.

Leetch was hardest hit going for a plus 31 to a minus 36 and Gretzky at ES couldn't outscore his opponents anymore which had been an ongoing trend after leaving the high flying Oilers.

the possibly greatest thing about Gretzky is that he would always perform even better at ES in the playoffs even when his regular season ES play wasn't very dominant or even average.

The thing is this is hard to see because well he was Wayne Gretzky and it's almost sacrilege to not always view him as always being the great one.

 

[tazzy19]

The thing is that the NYR as a team fell off the collective cliff from 97-98 when Moose and Buekoboom was done.

The NYR save % went from .915 to .903 which simply is devastating for any team.

Leetch was hardest hit going for a plus 31 to a minus 36 and Gretzky at ES couldn't outscore his opponents anymore which had been an ongoing trend after leaving the high flying Oilers.

the possibly greatest thing about Gretzky is that he would always perform even better at ES in the playoffs even when his regular season ES play wasn't very dominant or even average.

The thing is this is hard to see because well he was Wayne Gretzky and it's almost sacrilege to not always view him as always being the great one.

That's not really true though. Gretzky was still a plus player (plus 30 in 1991 with a ridiculous 103 even strength points) until Gary Suter almost ended his career in the 91 Canada Cup. After this, Gretzky played for a lot of horribly minus teams, so you can't blame him. Had he not been mangled by Gary Suter (and the subsequent herniated disc), then perhaps he could have combatted the effect of those minus teams, or at least to some degree. But to suggest that he became a minus player during some seasons just because he left the Oilers is quite false, putting it mildly.

 

[Up the Irons]

that's easy. right after that mother!@#$%&<>!!!!!, son of a *&^%$#@ Gary Suter took care of 99, he was never the same.

 

[The Panther]

One thing I noticed, looking at game logs from NYR in 1997-98, is that Gretzky consistently had fewer shifts than many other players/forwards on his team. I mean, I guess you'd expect the top-4 D-men to have more shifts (or would you?), but I wouldn't have expected the second and third-line forwards to regularly have more shifts per game than Gretzky.

Is this because Gretzky took longer shifts (was sort of double-shifted often), or was he actually getting such reduced ice-time?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

One thing I noticed, looking at game logs from NYR in 1997-98, is that Gretzky consistently had fewer shifts than many other players/forwards on his team. I mean, I guess you'd expect the top-4 D-men to have more shifts (or would you?), but I wouldn't have expected the second and third-line forwards to regularly have more shifts per game than Gretzky.

Is this because Gretzky took longer shifts (was sort of double-shifted often), or was he actually getting such reduced ice-time?

Conveniently, NHL.com has ice time going back to 1997-98.

Gretzky was 2nd in ATOI on the Rangers among players who played more than 1 games.

TOI leaders among players who played at least 20 games:

Leetch D 76 GP 29:49
Gretzky C 82 GP 21:34
Karpotsev D 47 GP 21:12
Driver D 75 GP 20:39
Graves LW 72 GP 20:24
Sundstrom RW 70 GP 19:43
Samuelsson D 73 GP 19:10

By comparison, here are the average TOI for the league's top scorers:

Jagr 102 points / 77 GP / 23:50
Forsberg 91 points / 72 GP / 23:07
Gretzky 90 points / 82 GP / 21:34
Bure 90 points / 82 GP / 23:43
Francis 87 points / 81 GP / 23:03
LeClair 87 points / 82 GP / 21:27
Palffy 87 points / 82 GP / 22:27

Gretzy had quite a bit less average TOI/G than Jagr, Forsberg, Bure, or Francis, but Jagr missed 5 games and Forsberg missed 10 games.

HOWEVER, it appears that Gretzky's lack of ice time might just be because he was no longer used to kill penalties. 0 SHPs for Gretzky, which is highly unusual for him. Jagr also had 0 SHPs, not surprising, he rarely killed penalties over the course of his career. So it looks like Jagr's advantage in ice time was largely due to ES and PP time. Forsberg and Bure, however, killed a good number of penalties, so their ES + PP TOI per game was probably similar to Gretzky's

 

[Rebuilt]

Has it ever occured to anyone that the reason why scoring is down today is because the goalies have become so much better than the shooters?

The goalies are far better than they were in the late 70s in terms of position. Defenders are far better in terms of blocking forwards out. Defending forwards block shots far more often now.

How come the forwards havent advanced to compensate?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Has it ever occured to anyone that the reason why scoring is down today is because the goalies have become so much better than the shooters?

The goalies are far better than they were in the late 70s in terms of position. Defenders are far better in terms of blocking forwards out. Defending forwards block shots far more often now.

How come the forwards havent advanced to compensate?

Not really sure why you are posting this comment in this particular thread. But...

The explosion of scoring in the 1980s was largely due to the integration of the European East-West game, but the downturn in the 1990s was when defensive systems finally caught up to it.

It's a general fact of sports that as games become more coach-driven, they tend to become more defensive. It's a lot easier to coach defense, while offense is usually more talent-based.

As for goaltending, the proliferation of the butterfly was basically a result of sports science, and particularly the study of probabilities. How can you do a similar thing for forwards? Likewise, the explosion of goaltending equipment is a technology thing, which is in no way compensated for by better sticks. Better sticks can shoot the puck harder.... but there is still less room to shoot at.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Not really sure why you are posting this comment in this particular thread. But...

The explosion of scoring in the 1980s was largely due to the integration of the European East-West game, but the downturn in the 1990s was when defensive systems finally caught up to it.

It's a general fact of sports that as games become more coach-driven, they tend to become more defensive. It's a lot easier to coach defense, while offense is usually more talent-based.

As for goaltending, the proliferation of the butterfly was basically a result of sports science, and particularly the study of probabilities. How can you do a similar thing for forwards? Likewise, the explosion of goaltending equipment is a technology thing, which is in no way compensated for by better sticks. Better sticks can shoot the puck harder.... but there is still less room to shoot at.

this is the elephant in the room that Bettman has allowed to take over the NHL in the name of "Parity."

Making the nets 2 inches wider and 1 inch taller would go a long way to balance the snipers and goalies back to earlier times but I'm not holding my breath on it.

 

[revolverjgw]

this is the elephant in the room that Bettman has allowed to take over the NHL in the name of "Parity."

Making the nets 2 inches wider and 1 inch taller would go a long way to balance the snipers and goalies back to earlier times but I'm not holding my breath on it.

People will cry about tradition and goalies having to relearn the angles and stuff, nevermind that this traditional balance was thrown out the door a long time ago and those traditional angles and stuff as originally designed don't mean anything anymore and players have had to relearn entirely new ones anyway as the game has rapidly outgrown its traditional confines.

 

[The Panther]

Making the nets 2 inches wider and 1 inch taller would go a long way to balance the snipers and goalies back to earlier times but I'm not holding my breath on it.

I completely agree with this, and I think those are the correct dimensions.

Baseball once lowered the mound by half, didn't it? No reason hockey can't compensate for the fact that the average goalie is a foot taller and 40 pounds heavier with twice the size of catching gloves and pads of half the weight, of 35+ years ago.

 

[Big Phil]

Let's also pause to remember that Bure's best seasons (110 and 107 points) overlap with Gretzky's 130-point scoring title (age age 33).

Snap!

We all know a 1994 Gretzky was a shadow of his former self from, say, 10 years earlier.

Didn't that surge coincide with Peter Forsberg's father making a comment about how Gretzky was done and was embarassing himself (or something to that effect)?

Ya just don't say stuff like that about players like that!

He said Gretzky should retire. This was during the 1997-'98 season, before the Olympics if I recall because I remember being glad Canada beat Sweden just based off of that. Funny though, his son was in his prime and he outpointed this Gretzky guy hanging on for too long by just a single point.

this is the elephant in the room that Bettman has allowed to take over the NHL in the name of "Parity."

Making the nets 2 inches wider and 1 inch taller would go a long way to balance the snipers and goalies back to earlier times but I'm not holding my breath on it.

Ah, the NHL. The only league in the world that is somehow incapable of saying "Your pads are too big, we are going to regulate that." Instead they find every other way in the book to try and increase scoring. Oh..........let's not forget expanding two teams where 45 guys who weren't good enough to make the NHL in the first place will help...............right?

 

[Big Phil]

The thing with Gretzky is that his standards are so high that when he finally did putting up 200 points it was a knock on him. He goes from 215 points to 183 in 1987. That's 32 points. Does anyone really think Gretzky was a worse player in 1987 than 1986? Do we not remember the Canada Cup that year? Gretzky from 1979-'91 was not a whole lot different. Well, maybe after his rookie season. He was more explosive of a goal scorer in his earlier years, but his point totals didn't suffer that badly either.

But my question is, how long did people expect a human being to score 200 points a year? Gretzky did it for 5 years more or less with 196 being the only year. Other than that, he hits 183 after that and is on pace for 188 in 1988. Are we really going to nitpick like that?

 

[The Panther]

From 1981-82 to 1986-87 (6 seasons), Gretzky averaged:

203 points = 73 goals, 130 assists (+76)

In those 6 years, the next-best goal scorer (Bossy) had 105 fewer goals... and this was the guy many said then was the best goal-scorer ever.

In those 6 years, his assists are 337 more than 2nd-best Peter Stastny.

In those 6 years, his points are best by a 1219 to 698 (Bossy) margin -- nearly 2 to 1.

His plus/minus is best by a +456 to +279 (Kurri) margin. If you don't count his linemate and teammate (Coffey), that difference is +456 to +262, nearly +200 better than Hall of Fame D-man Mark Howe.

How about those 6 years' playoffs? His PPG is best by a 2.08 to 1.53 margin, but that 2nd-place is Barry Pederson's piddly 34 games and #3 is Wayne's linemate Jari Kurri. If you waive those two, Gretzky beats Rick Middleton by a 2.08 to 1.38 per-game margin. In the playoffs he went +28 in 18 games in 1985, scoring 7 goals in 5 games in the Finals against the League's toughest defensive team.

During those 6 years, Gretzky also won the Hart Trophy every year (actually 8 in a row), and his team finished 1st in its division every season, and 1st overall 3 times. He won the Stanley Cup 3 times in 4 years, and made the Finals 4 times (and won the Canada Cup, as leading scorer, twice in two tries). He led the NHL playoffs in scoring every time he made the Finals (x 4), setting all-time marks for assists and points and plus/minus that have never been matched.


As far as any 6 seasons go? Forget about it. Gretzky's 1981-82 through 1986-87 craps on every Hall of Famer ever.

Now, if you want to whittle seasons down to maybe 3, a case can be made for Bobby Orr's 1969-70 to 1971-72 (including both his Stanley Cups). I wouldn't make that argument, but you could. Or, if you want to inflate the seasons up to more than, say, 15, a case can be made for Gordie Howe. But any measure of player seasons larger than 3 and less than 16 is result-Gretzky. And no 6 seasons in NHL past or future matched/will match what he did during 1981-82 to 1986-87.