| Author |
 Topic  |
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
 Posted - 01/10/2007 : 11:54:42
|
| Actually Spears, it probably wouldn't have helped because I'd still have an argument as I don't even put Gretzky in my top 5. Yeah, that' s right. |
 |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/10/2007 : 12:07:06
|
Willus3, I am a little shocked. I understand there are many camps as to who is the best of all time. I would really like to hear the rational of how you would not even put Wayne in the top 5. That would make no sense to anyone in the hockey world. When it comes down to it, the arguments for Orr as the best ever are very valid. So are the arguments for Wayne. Almost everyone agrees that Howe's longevity and talent for that length of time put him near the top. And Lemiuex with a shortened career also did some amazing things. As I said in previous posts, the top 5 of all time would be Gretzky, Orr, Howe, Lemiuex, with my 5th being Messier. You could throw in a Richard or Esposito in there as well, but few would argue the top 4 being Gretzky, Orr, Howe, and Lemieux.
What is your top 5?? Where would Wayne fit and why??
And to answer your question on what my definition of the best hockey player would be, in no particular order:
Longevity, records, Cups, and impact to the game. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 10:16:07
|
1) Orr
2) Lemieux
3) Howe
4) Messier
5) Beliveau
6) Doug Harvey
7) Denis Potvin
8) Gretzky
Joe Sakic will eventually be there somewhere. He is a joy to watch.
I look for complete players. The top 7 are great complete players. They could do everything. And they did it very well. In fact they did it exceptionally well.
Longevity is hardly a way to measure greatness. It just allows a player to accumulate more records, cups, awards etc..
But any player can have their career cut short by an injury. Even with the advances in modern medicine an injury can take a player out permanently.
Look at Pavel Bure. If a player came along and scored 300 points a season but only played for two seasons would he not be recognized as great.
It doesn't take 20 years to see how talented they are.
How many cups did Wayne win after he left the Oilers dynasty? Umm... oh yeah, none.
But the number of cups you win is not very relevant either. There are average players who happened to play for the Montreal Canadians who have 5 or 6 cups. Then there a great players like Ray Bourque who only have 1 (some have none) and that was only because he was traded to a contender late in his career.
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 10:53:51
|
Honestly Willus, I am shocked. I thought you did have a pretty good mind for hockey and I am willing to agree to disagree on who is number one, but how can you put guys like Harvey, Beliveau and Potvin ahead of the Wayne? Really, it makes no sense.
And longevity has a huge amount to do with greatness. If a player is in the league for 20 years and is a top player for those 20 years, in my opinion, that shows more greatness than a player who played 10 years in the league and was at the top or a player who played for 20 years and was amazing for 10 years and average for 10 years. To be on top, stay on top, and stay on top for a long time means a lot. Look at Gordie Howe, If you take any 10 year period of hockey he played (statistically) it is good, but not enough to make him a best ever. But look at his 40 year career, where he was very competitive and productive for the majority of those years, that puts his greatness higher.
I would not argue that Beliveau, Harvey, and Potvin were not great players in their own right, but I just can't understand how they are better than Greztky. Or even guys like Bossy, Sakic, or Esposito??
And to your Cup argument, how many did Orr win away from Boston?? Beliveau, Harvey, or Potvin away from Montreal and NY? Messier had one without the Oilers as well. What is you point??
Maybe the fact that I did get to watch much hockey prior to the early 80's so I didn't see many of the players on your list. I just can't understand your thinking. Your Orr arguments are quite valid. I will never put him ahead of Gretzky, but you have some great points to defend your opinion on Orr. But to put these other guys ahead of Gretzky makes no sense what so ever. What is it that made Lemieux and Messier better??
Your losing stock with me when you can't say more than these guys were exceptions complete players. All of these guys are that.
And you are right, there are many average players with their name on the Cup. For God Sakes, Toronto has how many Cups?? One argument is that when there are only 6 teams in the league, the challenge of winning the Cup is far less than 20 or 30 teams in the league. Also, a shorter season in the past game players a lower amount of wear on the body and gave player a lot of time off between season to recover from anything.
Let's not forget the things that people do away from the NHL. If this is the Greatest Player, does this not include international competition?? If that is the case, and this is an honest question, did Howe, Orr, Beliveau or Harvey ever represent their country in international competitions?? If so, how did they fair??
That is the one area I would put Lemieux ahead of Gretzky. He is by far the best player in the History of International Competition.
Not sure man, just don't see your logic in this. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 12:18:01
|
It doesn't take 20 years to recognize how great a player is. Maybe it takes you that long because until you read the stats on a player you can't tell.
You must not understand what a complete hockey player is. I already stated that's why i put those guys ahead of Wayne.
What is my point about the cups? What is your point? You used # of cups as a way to measure a great player. I thought i was pretty clear.
Then about Wayne not winning any away from Edmonton I was trying to get across that he was on a great team and it wasn't him who won the cup. He helped them win them. As they proved they could do it without him. Don't make it sound like it was all him, otherwise he would have his name on 20 cups. Cups do not define a great player.
Do not include Wayne when you say these are all great complete players.
You'll see why later.
And you didn't just ask that question about int'l hockey did you?
You need to brush up on your history. The inaugural Canada Cup in '76.
Champions - Canada. MVP- Orr. It was unanimous. He was playing on one leg at the time as well. Bobby Hull was quoted as saying " Bobby was better on one leg than the rest of us were on two, that's how great he was."
High praise indeed.
Had Orr played in the '72 series it would have been called the Bobby Orr show and Canada would have won in a sweep. As good as Russia was they wouldn't have been able to handle Canada with Bobby.
Now to illustrate my complete player view, do this for me:
Rate Wayne and Bobby in the following areas with a percentage.
Wayne Bobby
Passing
Shooting
Playmaking
Toughness
Checking
Creativeness
Agility
Skating
Defense
Offence
|
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 13:19:20
|
Willus, my point behind the Cups was that you made the comment that Wayne did not win after the Oilers. I was simply stating the neither did Orr. My point was against your comment, not against using Cups as a gauge of greatness. And do you not think that if Bourque had say, 4 or more Rings, he would be more highly regarded??
And what exactly is the goal of all Hockey players?? To win the Cup, is it not??
And to your point that I need to brush up on history. You are right. Pretty hard for me to remember 72 and 76 as I wasn't even born then. I appreciate the lesson. (no sarcasm intended)
And to rate the two players, I would not do it justice. I did not see Orr play enough to give it a fair assessment. From what I do know I can say that Orr would be ahead of Gretzky in Skating, Checking, Toughness, agility and defense. Wayne would be ahead of Orr in Passing, Shooting(maybe not the hardest shot but the scoring records do not lie), playmaking, creativeness, and offense. So does that say that Orr was a better defensive player than Wayne? Yup, no question. Does that say that Gretzky is a better offensive player than Orr? Definitely. What does that prove again?? I wish I could rate them more specifically, but without being able to watch a bunch of Orr, I can't do it justice. This rating itself may not have done him justice.
As I said before, the statement of a "complete player" is purely on an opinion. It is not something you can say definitively. Orr's play was fantastic both ways, no question. Wayne's offense was amazing, and he was far from a liability on defense. Was Orr as good as Gretzky offensively, nope. So, if Orr is great offensively and defensively and Gretzky is amazing offensively and above average defensively that says what?? I will agree that Orr was as great defensively as he was offensively. I can not say that Gretzky was as good defensively as he was offensively. However, his offensive prowess far than exceeded his lack of defensive greatness.
Still, you have yet to answer my question as to why you would put the most prolific offensive player in the history of the game as #8 all time. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 14:28:49
|
Why would he be more respected if he had won more cups? I(He is very highly regarded now, 14th on that top 50 list) f a guy does everything he can to try and help his team win but just doesn't have the team to do it, it certainly is not his fault he doesn't win a cup. It's a rare player that gets to choose which team he plays for. Mario went to the bottom of the barrel Penguins, but they eventually brought in players to support him and win. Cups have more to do with Management than individual players.
You should treat yourself and try to find as much Orr footage that you can. Whole games if you can find them. You need to see it to understand. Trust me, you'll love it.
I did answer your question. I rate complete players higher than players with singular ability. Watching an all around player is very entertaining for me. Stats aren't as important for me. That's probably why i don't respect Gretzky as much as a lot of people. He seems more proud of his individual accomplishments than his team accomplishments.
And i'm curious why you would say Gretzky is better offensively than Orr. And before you guffaw and say are you serious, think about it. |
|
|
|
bablaboushka
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2417 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 15:16:02
|
I can't believe this is still being debated. It's one of those things where everyone has their opinion and no one will ever convince anyone otherwise.
Let me sum up the last 100 posts:
Most Accomplished: Wayne Gretzky
Most Skilled: Bobby Orr |
Edited by - bablaboushka on 01/11/2007 15:16:31 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 15:23:01
|
That's a good way to say it Bab's, but who's the best??
As you can tell, I will never let anything die. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 17:25:41
|
Well finally we agree on something Beans. That is a fantastic way to put it Babla.
I'm a stubborn mofo but i can leave it at that.
Great arguing with you though beans.
Any other good discussions going on in here? |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 18:20:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
...I rate complete players higher than players with singular ability. Watching an all around player is very entertaining for me. Stats aren't as important for me. That's probably why i don't respect Gretzky as much as a lot of people. He seems more proud of his individual accomplishments than his team accomplishments...
interesting discussion beans and willus. Willus, slight change of topic (maybe babs could make this a new thread???) I'm not sure that Gretzky has projected that he is more "proud" of his individual accomplishments than his team ones. I watched Gretzky's entire career and in almost all cases he seemed reluctant to talk about personal achievements and always handed credit to his teammates, to the point I sometimes found it annoying (I wished he would just admit to being great!) The media often corners stars and I always thought he did a great job of downplaying his abilities when railroaded. How did you come to your conclusion? |
|
|
|
djthatsme
Top Prospect
Canada
1 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 18:26:05
|
K noone is better then wayne! Mario lemiux is just a big baby! Bobby orr is good tho but he didnt do wat wayne grexesty did!
David |
|
|
|
I HATE CROSBY
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
538 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2007 : 19:13:02
|
[quote]Originally posted by djthatsme
K noone is better then wayne! Mario lemiux is just a big baby! Bobby orr is good tho but he didnt do wat wayne grexesty did!
David
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
my new hero
I HATE CROSBY |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 08:44:38
|
I feel like I have to ask a few more points to Willus on this one.
Your comment that watching an all around player was very entertaining and that stats are not important hence your view of Gretzky. I would have to ask if had a chance to watch a lot of Wayne? I am dumbfounded that you could say that watching Gretzky play was not enjoyable.
And finally, to your point on Gretzky over Orr offensively. If Gretzky was sitting with about 1800 points at the end of his career you would have an arguement. But like I said in previous posts, Gretzky had Orr's offensive numbers covered in 5 years. He had over 3 times the points that Orr did in his career. I know Orr was a defenceman and I know that you don't put stock into stats, but I do. How can you argue with the all time leader in goals, assists, points, and PPG. That is offense. Offense can be measured. Wayne lead all by a landslide. How can you argue that Orr played 657 NHL games and scored 270 goals and 645 assists for 915 points in 12 seasons for 1.39 PPG. Absolutely amazing stats, even more impressive for a defenseman. Now, in Wayne's first 5 seasons he had 356 goals and 619 assists for 975 points. And that was in 393 games for 2.48 PPG. Offense goes to Wayne every time. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 11:48:29
|
Most certainly i did. I watched a great many games with Wayne.
I didn't say he wasn't entertaining to watch. He made a lot of incredible plays and passes. I just find it more impressive to watch someone that can do it all.
Ummm... I would hope that he would be able to put up higher offensive numbers, he was a CENTRE. Comparing the offensive numbers from a d-man to a forward is silly. Almost like saying, hey look at how many more Norris trophies Bobby won. Absurd.
Apples to apples. That's why I gave you that stat before. You have to use a better method of evaluating them. Comparing how much better they were than the next best player in their respective positions was a way to do that. It's one tool to show how dominant they were. If you still don't get how that's relevant, well.... it doesn't get much clearer than that. And before you ask why i'm reffering to a stat, again, it is for your benefit as you seem to like them so much.
Again, Babs put it best, and so this will be my last post on this subject.
Feel free to reply though. I'll read it.
|
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 18:35:17
|
Hey Beans, and all you others who think Gretz is the best. Watch this clip. It's one of the better ones as it shows everything Orr could do. Not just scoring but his defensive abilities and even saving goals. This is a complete player. I think you'll all enjoy it. It's definitely a treat. Also you should read the comments below the vid on youtube. Let me know what you think Beans. And anyone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lv0-9Wi713o
|
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 14:10:48
|
| Willus, I really need to be honest here. Without bias towards who is better and comparing any players. I just finished watching the first link you put on, and for 3:27 I was amazed. He was without question the best skater in the league. It was a full 3 1/2 minutes of him skating past everyone on the ice and going one on one with the goalie. Ya, there were some pretty impressive defensive plays as well. But overall, it was him skating and scoring. Well, if that is the way you would like to represent Orr, then I am shocked.Through the entire thing he was not only skating past the opposition, but also his own team!!!!! 3:27 and 2 passes?? 2!!!!! I can say this with ease, if that is the representation of Orr, then he was not only the greatest skater in the history of the league, but also the most selfish hockey player in any league in any time at any place in the world. If you are basing Orr on that video, that is exactly what I see. Absolutely amazing individual efforts. But isn't hockey a team sport?? Never knew he was that selfish. Maybe just the video, but that is exactly that I see. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 19:35:17
|
LOL. Wow really? Selfish? Is being selfish how you set the record for assists in a season until Gretzky broke it?
Watch it again. You'll see some incredible passes too.
The only two players with more assists in a season are Wayne and Mario. Both forwards.
Anyway, I'm glad you enjoyed seeing how dominant he was. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 19:36:43
|
Oh Look i was 99th to reply to this thread. I am Honored.
Huhuhuhuhuuuhuhh. |
|
|
|
Guest6866
( )
|
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 14:50:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Here comes yet another reply from the "Gretzky Camp."
1) I am thinking if you want to compare Orr's first 9 years, then compare them with Gretzky's first 9 years. Gretzky has 1669 points in the regular season,and 272 play-off points in 9 appearances. This includes 4 Cups in a league with more than 12 teams. Orr's numbers do not compare. Not even close. Gretzky had Orr's numbers covered in less than 6 years. And as far as your cyclic level, with Gretzky's first 9 years roled into 18 years, that's 3338 points! C'mon, at least compare apples to apples.
2) Your comments make Gretzky out to be a total bum. You may have some valid points that Gretzky was "protected" while Orr had to fight his own battle, but can you honestly think that he would not have still has the productivity that he had?? As a rookie he has 51 goals and 137 points. No one knew who he was then, and look what he did. By the way, he was 17 years old!!!
3) Complete player is an unfair assessment because hockey is a team game. Gretzky's game suited the teams he played on the same way Orr's play suited the teams he played on. That's why there are different roles on each team. Gretzky fit his role perfectly, just as Semenko did for that team.
3) I didn't know that empty net goals didn't count? So, does that mean the seasons that Gretzky had of 71, 87, and 77 don't count either??
4) I have not once discredited anything that Orr, Howe, or Lemieux have done. Why is it that people from "Non-Gretzky" camps feel the need to discredit all of the things he accomplished.
5) Gordie Howe, who played against both Orr and Gretzky says that Wayne is hand's down the best player. I could care less about sports writers, coaches and refs. Who do the players say?? Wayne.
6) I will say this, Bobby Orr was the best defensemen to ever play the game, no question about it. He paved the way for a guy like Paul Coffey to do what he did. He revolutionized the defensemen position to what it is today. Without the thing he did, hockey would not be the great game it is today. I give him all the credit in the world, only not as the greatest player to ever play.
7) This is all opinion based. If Orr and Gretzky played at the same time, with the same rules, the same positions, and against the same teams, this could be an argument. So, I will fight until I am blue in the face the Gretzky is King, you will do the same for Orr.
Greztky didn't do it at 17! He did it in 19.2 years old you fool! |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 14:52:46
|
| Gretzky. |
|
|
|
Guest6866
( )
|
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 15:07:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Honestly Willus, I am shocked. I thought you did have a pretty good mind for hockey and I am willing to agree to disagree on who is number one, but how can you put guys like Harvey, Beliveau and Potvin ahead of the Wayne? Really, it makes no sense.
And longevity has a huge amount to do with greatness. If a player is in the league for 20 years and is a top player for those 20 years, in my opinion, that shows more greatness than a player who played 10 years in the league and was at the top or a player who played for 20 years and was amazing for 10 years and average for 10 years. To be on top, stay on top, and stay on top for a long time means a lot. Look at Gordie Howe, If you take any 10 year period of hockey he played (statistically) it is good, but not enough to make him a best ever. But look at his 40 year career, where he was very competitive and productive for the majority of those years, that puts his greatness higher.
I would not argue that Beliveau, Harvey, and Potvin were not great players in their own right, but I just can't understand how they are better than Greztky. Or even guys like Bossy, Sakic, or Esposito??
And to your Cup argument, how many did Orr win away from Boston?? Beliveau, Harvey, or Potvin away from Montreal and NY? Messier had one without the Oilers as well. What is you point??
Maybe the fact that I did get to watch much hockey prior to the early 80's so I didn't see many of the players on your list. I just can't understand your thinking. Your Orr arguments are quite valid. I will never put him ahead of Gretzky, but you have some great points to defend your opinion on Orr. But to put these other guys ahead of Gretzky makes no sense what so ever. What is it that made Lemieux and Messier better??
Your losing stock with me when you can't say more than these guys were exceptions complete players. All of these guys are that.
And you are right, there are many average players with their name on the Cup. For God Sakes, Toronto has how many Cups?? One argument is that when there are only 6 teams in the league, the challenge of winning the Cup is far less than 20 or 30 teams in the league. Also, a shorter season in the past game players a lower amount of wear on the body and gave player a lot of time off between season to recover from anything.
Let's not forget the things that people do away from the NHL. If this is the Greatest Player, does this not include international competition?? If that is the case, and this is an honest question, did Howe, Orr, Beliveau or Harvey ever represent their country in international competitions?? If so, how did they fair??
That is the one area I would put Lemieux ahead of Gretzky. He is by far the best player in the History of International Competition.
Not sure man, just don't see your logic in this.
Hey stupid! Shall I note that Orr was out of Boston for 1 SEASON!!!!Gretzky was out for 13! Learn to count! |
|
|
|
leafsfan_101
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1530 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 15:29:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6866
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Honestly Willus, I am shocked. I thought you did have a pretty good mind for hockey and I am willing to agree to disagree on who is number one, but how can you put guys like Harvey, Beliveau and Potvin ahead of the Wayne? Really, it makes no sense.
And longevity has a huge amount to do with greatness. If a player is in the league for 20 years and is a top player for those 20 years, in my opinion, that shows more greatness than a player who played 10 years in the league and was at the top or a player who played for 20 years and was amazing for 10 years and average for 10 years. To be on top, stay on top, and stay on top for a long time means a lot. Look at Gordie Howe, If you take any 10 year period of hockey he played (statistically) it is good, but not enough to make him a best ever. But look at his 40 year career, where he was very competitive and productive for the majority of those years, that puts his greatness higher.
I would not argue that Beliveau, Harvey, and Potvin were not great players in their own right, but I just can't understand how they are better than Greztky. Or even guys like Bossy, Sakic, or Esposito??
And to your Cup argument, how many did Orr win away from Boston?? Beliveau, Harvey, or Potvin away from Montreal and NY? Messier had one without the Oilers as well. What is you point??
Maybe the fact that I did get to watch much hockey prior to the early 80's so I didn't see many of the players on your list. I just can't understand your thinking. Your Orr arguments are quite valid. I will never put him ahead of Gretzky, but you have some great points to defend your opinion on Orr. But to put these other guys ahead of Gretzky makes no sense what so ever. What is it that made Lemieux and Messier better??
Your losing stock with me when you can't say more than these guys were exceptions complete players. All of these guys are that.
And you are right, there are many average players with their name on the Cup. For God Sakes, Toronto has how many Cups?? One argument is that when there are only 6 teams in the league, the challenge of winning the Cup is far less than 20 or 30 teams in the league. Also, a shorter season in the past game players a lower amount of wear on the body and gave player a lot of time off between season to recover from anything.
Let's not forget the things that people do away from the NHL. If this is the Greatest Player, does this not include international competition?? If that is the case, and this is an honest question, did Howe, Orr, Beliveau or Harvey ever represent their country in international competitions?? If so, how did they fair??
That is the one area I would put Lemieux ahead of Gretzky. He is by far the best player in the History of International Competition.
Not sure man, just don't see your logic in this.
Hey stupid! Shall I note that Orr was out of Boston for 1 SEASON!!!!Gretzky was out for 13! Learn to count!
Before you call someone stupid, make a name loser.
Long Live Leafs Nation!! |
|
|
|
hockey coach
Top Prospect
Canada
5 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 16:00:21
|
you cannot say who was the greatest player on stats only.
each decade the game has evolved its simple to say how was the best in the 60 s 70 belong to orr the 80s would be gretzky until lemieux arrivedand the mid 90 belonged to jagr. pretty obvious that the now we see crosby as the dominat playe of the next era.
we have player in the hof with 600 pts careers in todays game you would be considered a bum player with a those stats.
this is why you cant determine who the greatest was, |
|
|
|
semin-rules
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1915 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 19:36:02
|
Welcome to the forums HC
I agree with alot of what you say i think you can't just say he is the best because he has the most pints it's about your style of play i think
~~~~~GO STARS~~~~~ |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 20:41:39
|
I agree you can't compare greatness by comparing stats between players from different eras... However, you can compare a player's relative stats during the era he played in versus others.
Gretzy was great. Compare him against all the other players of his era, and he's still great. There are other great players in the history of the NHL as well, but c'mon folks... |
|
|
|
1 Crosby fan
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1454 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 21:07:30
|
| I voted Lemuiex becuz i like to watch him i saw more highlights of him and he played for my Second most Fav. team |
|
|
|
Guest4943
( )
|
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 21:59:41
|
Darryl Sittle to me is the best.
Go Leafs |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 17:56:04
|
I look at this question this way. What if there were a draft of the best players in the history of the NHL in their prime (excluding goalies for whom there would be a separate draft). What if you had first pick in this draft. Who would you pick?
Personally, I would pick Orr ahead of Gretzky. Some of you might legitimately respond that if this is the question, it would make sense to build your team around defencemen. Maybe so, but actually Gretzky wouldn't be my first forward either. Messier would be. He was the best all-round forward I have ever seen. His physical presence combined with his leadership ability, particularly leading the Gretzky-less 1990 Oilers as well as the 1994 Rangers to the Cup, to me are what puts him above Gretzky.
Having said that, obviously Gretzky was a great, amazing, fabulous etc etc etc offensive player. To seriously suggest otherwise is kind of silly in my opinion. BUT for members of the "Gretzky Camp" to be so offended by someone even remotely suggesting that he wasn't the greatest player ever is, I think, even more silly (and a sad comment on society's obsessiveness with "being the best" as if being third or fourth best ever was not also a huge compliment).
One more point. If the question is, who was the most exciting player ever, Gretzky probably wouldn't make my top five. Lafleur, for example, was more exciting to me. Again this is not to say Gretzky wasn't very exciting at times. But maybe because of Danny Gallivan's announcing, or maybe because I was a rightfully nervous Bruins fan, Lafleur flying down the right side with the hair flowing was more exciting than anything Gretzky ever did. |
|
|
|
jbraiter
PickupHockey Pro
577 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 18:38:10
|
I think i am
Go Canucks |
|
|
|
Guest7011
( )
|
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 20:33:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest8336
Well, I feel i must respond again.
I think we would all agree that comparing Orr and Gretzky accurately is quite difficult. So may i suggest we compare how much better they were than the next best player in their relative positions. To do so let's use some stats. This should keep the pro Gretz camp happy as this is their number one(and pretty much only) argument to validate their claim.
The "previous" numbers listed below are from the next closest player that they surpassed..
This info is directly out of The Hockey News - 100 Greatest Players Book.
Starting with Gretzky. Highest Goals in a Season - 92
Previous highest goals in a season 76. A 21% increase.
Absolute increase: 26
Highest assists in a season - 163.
Previous highest assists in a season - 102. A 60% increase.
Absolute increase: 61
HIghest points in a season - 215.
Previous highest points in a season - 152. A 41% increase.
Absolute increase: 63
Very impressive indeed. Now lets look at how much better Orr was then his peers.
Highest Goals in a season - 46.
Previous highest goals in a season - 24. A 92% increase!!!!
Absolute increase: 22
Highest assists in a season - 102.
Previous highest assists in a season 52. A 96% increase!!!!!!
Absolute increase: 50
Highest points in a season - 139.
Previous highest points in a season - 63. A 121% increase!!!!!!
Absolute increase: 76
I hope the pro-Gretzky camp likes apples. Lol. Cause you can stick those apples in your pipe ans smoke 'em.
edited to reduce space.
I thought this was locked.
Nice stats. But it is unfair to use percentages in the points comparison between gretz and orr since prior to orr's era was lower scoring therefore any significant increase would result in a more favourable light to orr. It's like saying the first person to score a goal was infinitely better than all hockey players that will play the game because the % increase would be infinite.
If you look at absolute increases, Gretz wins 2 of the 3 categories listed. Being the greatest ever would mean in the history of the game past, present and future no one should come close to duplicating the statistical numbers. Considering coffey eclipsed or has come very close to orr's numbersr, suggests that orr's feat is amazing but just not the greatest ever.
Mario came close to gretz but not as regularly due to injuries in total output. Hull came darn close in goals. Maybe crosby someday come close to gretz's numbers on a consistent basis over 20 years. Only time will tell.
Just to show how gaudy gretz's stats are. If you were to play for 20 years without getting injured, to match the total output of gretz in points, you'd have to average 45 goals and 98 assists for 20 seasons to just match his overall number.
That's 143 points per year for 20 years. Is that insane or what? It is not what gretzky did in one year, 4 years or 10 years. It is what he did for 20 years.
I can't recall the exact quote but it was Jordan talking about the kids in the NBA today saying that these kids don't know how hard it is to average 30 ppg over the entire season let alone for their entire career.
I'm paraphrasing here: They all think they can put in 60 every night but they can't. They just don't realize the work required to put up numbers with any consistency. You get hurt, your body breaks down there are so many factors that stops you. It's the drive that keeps you going. Kids these days don't have that drive.
Would greatest ever be defined as a player who's numbers could not be approached in a lifetime? Like Nicklaus and Tiger. Unfortunately they don't play a sport but rather a past time. That's another debate.
|
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 00:10:05
|
| Nicely put 7011. Love to hear more from you, sign up. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 05:25:16
|
Guest 7011's comments about Gretzky's statistics being unbelievable, etc. are of course undeniable. These guys arguing against Gretzky being the best player ever should probably stay away from the statistic topic - though I would say that Orr's statistics for a defencemen are also unbelievable.
But Guest 7011 (and other Gretzky guys), lets put the stats on the side for a second, not to be totally forgotten of course, but not to be the main thing either. Lets say you are building a team from scratch. Say there are about 30 teams like today and you have all the great players in the history of the NHL available (goalies to be dealt with separately). You have first pick and you are assessing who would be the best hockey player to build your team around.
I certainly wouldn't think you are crazy if you say you would take Gretzky BUT, if you say it is a no-brainer, I would say you are crazy. And I would certainly hope that you would do a lot more than just look at Gretzky's statistics in thinking about this question. It should be a very difficult one as there are many arguments for taking at least three or four, if not more, players ahead of him. Not only Orr on defence by the way - but maybe Potvin and some other defencemen too. And for forwards, as I said last time, I'd take Messier, and if I would have seen Howe and Richard in their primes, maybe them too. I am not sure about Lemieux - that's an interesting question.
So for me, it depends on how you define the question, who is the greatest player ever. If the question is who had the best career results, I would give Gretzky the edge over others, though not by nearly as much as the Gretzky camp guys think. If the question is, who would you take on your team first, I'd take Messier, Orr and probably a few others too ahead of Gretzky. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 05:45:02
|
One more point,
7011 says, "Being the greatest ever would mean in the history of the game past, present and future no one should come close to duplicating the statistical numbers"
I disagree with that as the measure. We can go beyond stats books in answering this question. We can look at the players strengths, weaknesses, overall play in both ends of the ice, etc., etc. etc. Stats cannot be totally ignored but to just use them as the measure is, in my opinion, insufficient analysis of the question. |
|
|
|
Guest8372
( )
|
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 08:03:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
But Guest 7011 (and other Gretzky guys), lets put the stats on the side for a second, not to be totally forgotten of course, but not to be the main thing either. Lets say you are building a team from scratch. Say there are about 30 teams like today and you have all the great players in the history of the NHL available (goalies to be dealt with separately). You have first pick and you are assessing who would be the best hockey player to build your team around.
I certainly wouldn't think you are crazy if you say you would take Gretzky BUT, if you say it is a no-brainer, I would say you are crazy. And I would certainly hope that you would do a lot more than just look at Gretzky's statistics in thinking about this question. It should be a very difficult one as there are many arguments for taking at least three or four, if not more, players ahead of him. Not only Orr on defence by the way - but maybe Potvin and some other defencemen too. And for forwards, as I said last time, I'd take Messier, and if I would have seen Howe and Richard in their primes, maybe them too. I am not sure about Lemieux - that's an interesting question.
OK. I'll bite. To answer your question about who to build a franchise around: It would depend.
If building my franchise for 3 or 4 years yeah, I'd probably take someone else other than gretz. Hooray for all those bright burning flames that die out quickly. Strange way to build a franchise, if the franchise is going to be good only for a couple of years.
Building a franchise, meaning it should last and be good for a long time. If I was going to build my franchise to be good for 20+ years, I'd take gretz over messier, howe, yzerman, coffey, borque....
You can count the number of players who registered 150+ points in a season on one hand. C'mon if someone produces 150 points for 10 years they'd be a shoo in to the hall of fame. To do it for 20 years, not in my lifetime I don't think. |
|
|
|
87CrOsBy87
Top Prospect
Canada
30 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 15:52:48
|
id say sidney croby and bobby orr because he is my uncles agent
Lucas Maciuk |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 16:17:35
|
This is an endless debate... Everyone has the facts, and everyone has their opinions.
There not going to be too many people who change their mind after reading a few posts. A debate is great and healthy and I enjoy it. There are lots of players who deserve to be part of this discussion (Gret, Orr, Howe, Mess, ..) but I do find it amusing the number of other names that come into the mix that dont have any place in this discussion. |
Edited by - tctitans on 03/02/2007 16:19:03 |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 16:43:11
|
Guest 8372 - Forgetting stats for a second, and just concentrating on your assesment of them as hockey players, I'm curious why you would take Gretzky over Messier.
To me the long-term point you made may have some merit with Orr and Lemieux, but Messier was just as, if not more, durable than Gretzky.
Also, a separate point but I'd definitely think seriously about building my team around a defenceman. And this may tie into the question of the greatest player ever I think. What I am saying is that if one is asking "who is the greatest hockey player ever" one maybe has to consider that defencemen arguably have the toughest/most important position (always keeping goaltending out of this) and so an awesome defencemen who is amazing both offensively and defensively may in a way be more impressive and valuable and yes, greater, than an awesome forward.
I qualified the above point with "may" and "maybe" cause I'm not sure about it myself. That's why I personally go back and forth between Messier or Orr as the greatest hockey player ever. Gretzky comes third or fourth on my list. I know, you don't care about my list (you Gretzky guys probably say). But what always surprises me is just how much you Gretzky guys get offended at anyone even attempting at even raising an argument like this (like one of the first entries on this topic which was something like "Gretzky - Duh" as if no other choice were even remotely possible. And what is it with feeling so offended about that possibility? Third or fourth best hockey player ever! That's pretty impressive - nothing to be offended about. |
|
|
|
Guest4885
( )
|
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 17:22:09
|
i think this guy hu created this poll is wacked in the head. I say this because Steve Yzerman isnt even on that list. How could you ! If it wasnt 4 him Detroit would not be even as close as this good for so long, and byond. Now because of him, good players are wanna gonna c** here. So even tho he aint on that list my vote is Steve Yzerman.
Peace Easy  |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Greatest hockey player ever 
