Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
Of... course? I fail to understand what you are trying to argue here.Gretzky’s records weren’t usually discussed in hockey circles because they were thought to be unbreakable, including 894.
No one is even close to that number, not even legends like Jagr or Howe who played in the NHL for over 25 years and aged as well as they possibly could.
As great as Ovi was at his peak, his legacy as a player really took off in the past 10 years after the 2012 season. All the experts in the media were telling us that Ovi was finished.
Since then, he has achieved the following:
- 1x Hart
- 7x Rocket
- 1x Stanley Cup
- 1x Conn Smythe
- Climbed to 3rd place all time, pretty much guaranteed to retire 1st or 2nd at worst.
That’s a 1st ballot HHOF resume from age 27-37, far removed from his peak.
My point was:
- Numbers in hockey are not as "mythical" as in baseball. At least, not scoring totals. So, there are not tied to one's legacy as much. Gretzky is not linked
- Despite that, it would boost his legacy tremendously because it is a great accomplishment + it will be heavily marketed... as it should be!
- I do not think it impacts his all-time ranking if he does beat it. Like, the difference between finishing with 885 or 900 is negligible in the grand scheme of things. If you move him up (if he beats the record) or down (if he stalls at like 889), I think it is a filmsy argument.
Nothing you said addresses any of what I said. Maybe you are responding to my other post. In that case, well, your numbers kinda confirmed what I was saying. He "specialized" after a little dip in overall production and it resulted in a goal scoring "resurgence" but his points total never reached what they were during his peak. Of course, it is an HOF resume, but it is regression due to usage AND capacities nonetheless. If anything, it shows how unbelievable his peak was when the resume you posted is "regression".