Your Wildly Outrageous (History of) Hockey Opinions...

[The Macho King]

Looks like clearly Lemieux to me, and he wasn't playing, often on the same line, with someone scoring at the same rate as he was in the playoffs. Not that I think that Draisaitl is as good as McDavid, playoffs or otherwise.

I don't want to spend much time on McDavid vs Lemieux in a thread that isn't really about that, but I think McDavid is clearly one of the guys on the Jagr tier, but shaping up to have possibly the best individual career of any of those guys.

God he's blown so far by Jagr in my eyes. Jagr has a meh playoff resume for his caliber of player.

 

[JackSlater]

God he's blown so far by Jagr in my eyes. Jagr has a meh playoff resume for his caliber of player.

I have no issue with Jagr in the playoffs. Players on teams that lack depth struggle to win and often to score, but Jagr at least scored. Other than very rare exceptions though I generally think the regular season gives the real picture of a player, which may be contentious (not sure) but isn't a wildly outrageous hockey opinion.

 

[Overrated]

Junior Hockey, College Hockey and Elite Minor Hockey that feeds into Junior Hockey (most of which feeds into College Hockey other than CHL not USports bound players) have only grown since 1995. I don't think the number of rec house league players (something that is dying and would heavily impact registered player numbers but not the pathways to Pro Hockey) matters too much.

Didn't even Gretzky play in a small town house league as a little kid? What matters is the exposure to the sport. If you're talented you will definitely find your way to more elite leagues.

 

[MadLuke]

To give an example of what would be different now vs back then, the Turgeons.

Father did not want them to play hockey (too dangerous back then), Sylvain got used equipment from his cousins, $20 from his uncle and went by foot register himself with no parents and started to play without them knowing, in what would be late in age by now.

Him and his little brother Pierre ended up being 2nd and 1st overall pick in the nhl, both nice career one (sylvain before injury derailled it) with a great one obviously in the HOF.

Does that kind of super natural talent, end up in the nhl today without parents that care for it when they grow up ?

 

[WarriorofTime]

To give an example of what would be different now vs back then, the Turgeons.

Father did not want them to play hockey (too dangerous back then), Sylvain got used equipment from his cousins, $20 from his uncle and went by foot register himself with no parents and started to play without them knowing, in what would be late in age by now.

Him and his little brother Pierre ended up being 2nd and 1st overall pick in the nhl, both nice career one (sylvain before injury derailled it) with a great one obviously in the HOF.

Does that kind of super natural talent, end up in the nhl today without parents that care for it when they grow up ?

I doubt Lemieux could afford hockey today.

 

[JackSlater]

I doubt Lemieux could afford hockey today.

With regard to hockey in Canada, the pie is smaller but there are mechanisms in place to maximize the talent that is there. Most of this is economic. I'd be interested in a thread detailing the economic situations that players grew up in over the last few decades. One of my favourite recent-ish stories is about the Toronto area super team that used to exist (Pietrangelo, Stamkos, Tavares, Subban, Del Zotto etc.) where I believe it was the fathers of Stamkos and Pietrangelo and Del Zotto who had the money to create this super team from scratch, and they allowed Tavares on it because he was such a talent. I don't think that Tavares was rich, but his uncle was a highly successful professional athlete at least. The steps Zach Hyman's father went through for his hockey career are probably unmatched.

Mildly outrageous opinion, I think that teams could game plan for Datsyuk in the playoffs and it made him consistently less effective in the playoffs than Zetterberg. Due to this I think that Datsyuk was overrated, which still an elite player. Also Zetterberg was clearly better defensively, but there are plenty of people who agree (and plenty who disagree) with that.

 

[TooFlashy]

My outrageous opinion,Datsyuk deserved 3 selkes+was better player than MrEmptyNetGoal

 

[psycat]

Sundin is the best Swedish center ever. For whatever reason he didn't show it as much in the NHL(perhaps better suited to the larger ice? Or that his heart was not fully there for the grind that is the regular season). Sure I appreciate Forsberg as much as the next Swede but simply inferior player in my eyes. Greatest is Forsberg in terms of results but I firmly believe that if they swapped teams they would be viewed very differently. Abit Dionne and LaFleuresque I suppose.

Doug Harvey is not in the same tier as Bourque, Lidström, Potvin, Shore(?), Fetisov(?).

Phil Esposito is underrated and was not a product of Orr to nearly the extent that some would have you believe.

Erik Karlsson deserved the Norris he was awarded last year despite sucking this season.

A more personal, and speculative, one. I've always felt that Carl Söderberg could have been at the very least a solid 1st liner if he wen't over earlier and perhaps more than that if he didn't have his eye injury.

 

[The Panther]

Lemieux peaked in the most competitive era. Absolutely dominated the superstars of his day like Yzerman, Jagr, Bure, Sakic or Lindros. Had superior numbers to the late 20s Wayne Gretzky. Don't really get how is his top spot vulnerable. McDavid has trouble keeping up with 30 year old Nikita Kucherov.

(I'm not gonna get into the "most competitive era" thing, as I honestly have little interest in it.)

"Absolutely dominated the superstars of [Lemieux's] day." I mean, he was dominant, to be sure, but:
-- 1995 to 1997 and 2000-01, he did not dominate Jagr at all
-- In his career peak season (1988-89), he scored 1 more ES point than Yzerman
-- In 1996-97, he barely outscored Lindros in per game rates (this forum barely thinks Lindros is a top-100 player)
-- He didn't really have superior numbers to late 20s Gretzky. From 1989-90 to 1990-1991, Gretzky outscored Lemieux per game.

Point being, even with the most elite players of all time, there are going to be seasons and peers that rival them in scoring at certain times (the only exception being Gretzky from 1980-81 to 1987-88). An injured McDavid ending the recent season 0.04 PPG behind Kucherov -- one of the greatest hockey wingers of all time -- does not exempt McDavid from Lemieux-level consideration, as Lemieux himself had similar kind of seasons.

I think Lemieux was overall a 'better' and more skilled player than McDavid, and of course with two Cups and two Conn Smythes he had more championship mettle than McDavid currently has (though that's more of a team / situation thing than about individual ability). But as others have noted, McDavid peak season domination of peers (and domination of team scoring) are very peak-Lemieux like. Which guy ends up ranked higher, for me, will depend on how McDavid does from here on out. (For now, Mario is safe.)

 

[JackSlater]

The Conn Smythe should go to a player from the losing team in the finals roughly half the time. Also the scope of the trophy, where only a player from one team and maybe a second once a decade or so has a chance to win it, leaves it pretty irrelevant to me.

 

[K Fleur]

Messier would rank higher in my all time list if he wasn’t a dirty bald douche.

 

[Midnight Judges]

My outrageous opinion,Datsyuk deserved 3 selkes+was better player than MrEmptyNetGoal

Lemme guess, you're a Crosby fan who doesn't realize Crosby leads the generation in empty net points.

The Conn Smythe should go to a player from the losing team in the finals roughly half the time. Also the scope of the trophy, where only a player from one team and maybe a second once a decade or so has a chance to win it, leaves it pretty irrelevant to me.

Agree. I think there is this desired media narrative that the best/most valuable player always wins, but this is far from the case in a sport where the best forwards are on the ice for a little over 1/3 of the game.

 

[MadLuke]

Why put best in that sentence ? Conn Smythe is clearly an MVP award... there absolutely no notion that the Smythe goes to the best player, Williams winning it was not people voting that he was better at hockey than Doughty or Kopitar.

Not sure if the desired narrative that the best player always win, but more that the most valuable won because winning the cup has so much more value than the alternative.

Say winning the cup for a team has 3 time the value than reaching the final, 5 time the value of reaching the conference final if you were the most important piece of doing it, for someone to be more important to his team than that, it would need to be quite something.

 

[Overrated]

Why put best in that sentence ? Conn Smythe is clearly an MVP award... there absolutely no notion that the Smythe goes to the best player, Williams winning it was not people voting that he was better at hockey than Doughty or Kopitar.

Not sure if the desired narrative that the best player always win, but more that the most valuable won because winning the cup has so much more value than the alternative.

Say winning the cup for a team has 3 time the value than reaching the final, 5 time the value of reaching the conference final if you were the most important piece of doing it, for someone to be more important to his team than that, it would need to be quite something.

I think it probably should go to a losing team's player more often than it does. Not 50% but maybe 20% of the time for sure.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I think in 30 years people will see McDavid ahead of Lemieux. Obviously people can think whatever they want with a subjective “who was better” standard but Lemieux will have been roughly 60 years ago by that point and the further it goes the more he gets overshadowed by Gretzky in historical senses.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Why put best in that sentence ? Conn Smythe is clearly an MVP award... there absolutely no notion that the Smythe goes to the best player, Williams winning it was not people voting that he was better at hockey than Doughty or Kopitar.

Not sure if the desired narrative that the best player always win, but more that the most valuable won because winning the cup has so much more value than the alternative.

Say winning the cup for a team has 3 time the value than reaching the final, 5 time the value of reaching the conference final if you were the most important piece of doing it, for someone to be more important to his team than that, it would need to be quite something.

The point is, no individual player provides anywhere near enough value to win a cup.

The most valuable individual player can easily be on the losing team - and often is.

 

[JackSlater]

I don't think that Dryden was a great goaltender by any stretch, just the big goaltender playing behind the best defensive team, in terms of personnel and strategy, in NHL history. I expect he's forgotten as a mediocre, flaky 1970s goaltender if he ends up on any other team.

 

[Gorskyontario]

God he's blown so far by Jagr in my eyes. Jagr has a meh playoff resume for his caliber of player.

Jagr has over 200 points in the playoffs, your post literally makes less than zero sense.

 

[Gorskyontario]

-- 1995 to 1997 and 2000-01, he did not dominate Jagr at all

In the 94-95 season Lemieux missed the entire year. In 00-01 he only played 43 games. I really hope he dominated Jagr in point totals during that stretch.

 

[Gorskyontario]

I do want to re-iterate that I don't think McDavid overtakes Lemieux. At his best Lemieux was just a straight up better player. But McDavid's peak (2021 regular season, 2022 playoffs, 2023 regular season) is really high in a way we haven't seen since Lemieux.

Lemieux is a sad case(along with Bobby Orr, although it is unlikely Orr would have won too many more scoring titles if healthy) given he lost so many scoring titles due to poor health.

89-90. 90-91, 93-94, 94-95(all to Gretzky except 94-95). Gretzky had his last monster year in 90-91 so maybe Lemieux doesn't take that, but it's not unfair to say with better health Mario Lemieux ends up with more scoring titles, potentially more than Gretzky or equal.


McDavid has won 5. People are underrating him and his dominance here. This isn't a case of the 60's hawks where Mikita feasted on the 2nd best defenders. This guy is legit, he is still young, and people should absolutely be in awe of what McDavid is accomplishing, which until this point is a level of dominance seen ONLY by a small handful of players.

Howe
Hull/Mikita
Orr/Espo
Lafleur
Gretzky
Lemieux
Jagr

Obviously Crosby may have been there if he wasn't injured in the early 2010's. Best ppg in the league for 2 years but not many games played. Personally I have been waiting for a player of McDavids caliber since Jagr. No offense to Crosby, he didn't dominate like McDavid has. Although the pens typically had similar weaknesses they were generally a way better team than the oilers top to bottom.

5 art ross trophies, including 2 in a row, then 3 in a row. Incredible. Anyone blaming him for playoff losses is also out to lunch. He isn't the GM who decided to pay Nurse 8 or 9 million, and spend nearly 2 decades without finding a good goaltender.

 

[Overrated]

(I'm not gonna get into the "most competitive era" thing, as I honestly have little interest in it.)

"Absolutely dominated the superstars of [Lemieux's] day." I mean, he was dominant, to be sure, but:
-- 1995 to 1997 and 2000-01, he did not dominate Jagr at all

Between 95 and 97
Lemieux: 1.94 PPG
Jagr: 1.68 PPG

If we remove secondary assists the gap widens to 20% more.
Lemieux: 1.54
Jagr: 1.29

What is your point? That powerplay goals should not be counted at all? Or that they are less important, more replaceable etc? If they are just less important, then aren't SHG more important? Lemieux scored 8, Jagr just 1. It's quite obvious Mario was still the better player despite being 30+.

-- In his career peak season (1988-89), he scored 1 more ES point than Yzerman

So? Lemieux scored 13 goals shorthanded. Yzerman just 3. Maybe Yzerman should have improved his powerplays and shorthanded play.

-- In 1996-97, he barely outscored Lindros in per game rates (this forum barely thinks Lindros is a top-100 player)

So post cancer post back surgeries washed up 31 year old Lemieux still outscored a superstar at his very peak. That seems more of a pro-Lemieux argument if anything.

-- He didn't really have superior numbers to late 20s Gretzky. From 1989-90 to 1990-1991, Gretzky outscored Lemieux per game.

Your cherry picking gets more and more outrageous with each statement. You're now picking the two seasons where Lemieux barely played due to injuries and no he didn't really outscore him. His goals per game was almost 50% higher than what Gretzky produced. It's just that Gretzky raked up more of his secondary assists which led him to having a tiny bit higher PPG. Once you remove secondary assists injured Lemieux's numbers stay at 1.57 PPG while Gretzky's at 1.49.

If he just include his previous season w/o secondary assists
Lemieux: 1.80
Gretzky: 1.51

So 27-29 year old healthy Gretzky was badly outscored by Lemieux with health issues.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Don’t want to get into another Lemieux vs Gretzky debate.. but it’s funny that you accuse someone of cherry picking numbers and then start throwing out the secondary assists to get the result you want.. when talking about the greatest playmaker of all time

 

[Overrated]

Don’t want to get into another Lemieux vs Gretzky debate.. but it’s funny that you accuse someone of cherry picking numbers and then start throwing out the secondary assists to get the result you want.. when talking about the greatest playmaker of all time

When you think of it looking at points and not goals only when talking about the greatest goalscorer of all time is also cherry picking.

Nevertheless Mario's numbers including secondary assists are still quite a bit better than Gretzky's numbers from 88/89 to 90/91.

 

[The Macho King]

Jagr has over 200 points in the playoffs, your post literally makes less than zero sense.

In 208 games. He's sub ppg in the playoffs. Even setting aside his latter years, he is well below his regular season numbers.

 

[Run the Gauntlet]

I think in 30 years people will see McDavid ahead of Lemieux. Obviously people can think whatever they want with a subjective “who was better” standard but Lemieux will have been roughly 60 years ago by that point and the further it goes the more he gets overshadowed by Gretzky in historical senses.

What hurts Lemieux is the injuries.
But i think Lemieux has more memorable iconic moments than Gretzky.
For example, the goals against The North Stars in 1991 and the beat down of Bourque.
I dont think he will be overshadowed as much as you think.