Who is the best hockey player ever? [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

johnnyshaka

01-24-2006, 01:53 PM

Not to slight Howe or Lemieux, but if you put the two of them next to Gretzky in a lineup and then ask somebody who has no idea about hockey who the best hockey player of the three of them is...I assure you Gretz doesn't get a single look. Guys like Howe and Lemieux should dominate any physical sport they play because they have been born with all the physical tools to facilitate that.

Gretzky, on the other hand, used what he had and DOMINATED the game in every way despite not being the biggest, or strongest, or fastest guy on the ice.

Now, Bobby Orr, I could listen to an argument about him being one of the greatest as he really revolutionized how defensemen play the game.

SFL Cat

01-24-2006, 02:15 PM

What is this hockey you speak of?

ISiddiqui

01-24-2006, 02:16 PM

This poll is silly... Howe and Orr should be on the list as well as Sawchuck.

Though Gretz kills them all.

rkmsuf

01-24-2006, 02:17 PM

Reggie Dunlop

timmae

01-24-2006, 02:19 PM

this poll is indeed silly... if you even have to ask you just don't get it. No one will ever touch what one of these guys did... never. Up until a few days ago I put Wilt's 100 close to 99's point total. Not now... no one will ever get even that close.

Johnny93g

01-24-2006, 02:23 PM

This poll is silly... Howe and Orr should be on the list as well as Sawchuck.

Though Gretz kills them all.

Any discussion of the best ever must include both Howe and Orr. I would also include Maurice Richard. With that said, i say Gretzky is the best ever, followed by Orr, Howe, Lemiuex and Richard.

primelord

01-24-2006, 02:29 PM

Kevin

01-24-2006, 02:29 PM

Maurice Richard

(I am biased)

Honolulu_Blue

01-24-2006, 02:30 PM

What is this hockey you speak of?
Wait. Is this someone posting in a clearly identified hockey thread about how they hate hockey or think hockey is an irrelevant sport that no one cares or knows about? Is that what this is?

Quite hillarious, not to mention terribly original.

VPI97

01-24-2006, 02:31 PM

Reggie DunlopEddie Shore

Old time hockey

rkmsuf

01-24-2006, 02:32 PM

Wait. Is this someone posting in a clearly identified hockey thread about how they hate hockey or think hockey is an irrelevant sport that no one cares or knows about? Is that what this is?

Quite hillarious, not to mention terribly original.

At least I was subtle with my cool name and slapshot references.

primelord

01-24-2006, 02:33 PM

Maurice Richard

(I am biased)
I would be ok with Rocket being included in a discussion of who the best goal scorer ever was. Although I still wouldn't say he is even that, but as far as overall hockey player he just doesn't stack up.

ISiddiqui

01-24-2006, 02:33 PM

I think Jean Beliveau is in the discussion somewhere, but further down (though ahead of, say, Messier).

I think the biggest thing that hurt Lemieux is all the time he missed because of injury/cancer.
Perhaps, but that's a part of the game. You could say that Terrell Davis would have been better than Jim Brown or Walter Payton if he didn't run into injury problems, but you'll never know. For the few years he was healthy, he was just as good. I realize Lemieux played far more years, but the concept is the same.

As for the 'offensive era' argument against Gretzky. You can easily argue that the Oilers team was responsible for the booming offensive of the 80s. In the late 70s with the Flyers and early 80s with the Islanders, you didn't have a very offensive era. The Oilers just scored like crazy and other teams had to open it up to even compete with them.

Hurst2112

01-24-2006, 02:34 PM

Um, Howe. Hands down.

timmae

01-24-2006, 02:40 PM

I have always thought this debate is much closer than most people think it is. I think the biggest thing that hurt Lemieux is all the time he missed because of injury/cancer. In pure numbers no one stacks up with Gretzky. However his prime was in an ERA that produced FAR more offense on the whole than Lemieux's prime. Granted they overlap, but Gretzkys 90 goal, 150 assist seasons came in the offensive period and on some absolutely ridculously talented Oilers teams.

Super Mario doesn't have the total numbers that Gretzky does, but when Gretzky finished he finished with an average of 1.9 points per game for his career. Mario is at 1.88 points per game going into this season. Now certainly Gretzky played a little too long and brought his average down some, but at the same time he again played in a more offenive ERA in his prime.

In the end of Lemieux doesn't miss so much time I think the argument between the two is very close. Lemieux would have been much closer in terms of total production and he was still getting better in 89 when he had his 199 point season. With all that being said I think Gretzky is the better player, but as I said I think the debate should be much closer than it is.

I understand what you are getting at... just wanted to mention that if you are comparing points for a game for both you cannot take Gretzky's latter years into account. I can only assume that Lemieux would have declined some in his last years. I am also not a fan of what-ifs. Lets compare actual known quantities. Also, it's hard if not impossible to estimate what Lemieux would have done with better talent around him. he didn't have it so that doesn't enter into my equation.

I agree that the chasm is not as wide as most think, but the chasm is still there.

Honolulu_Blue

01-24-2006, 02:44 PM

At least I was subtle with my cool name and slapshot references.
Slapshot references are funny. You're ok here, smurf. You're ooookay. ;)

rkmsuf

01-24-2006, 02:45 PM

Slapshot references are funny. You're ok here, smurf. You're ooookay. ;)

It's cool to be loved by the hockeykrishnas.

Maple Leafs

01-24-2006, 03:04 PM

Not even close.

Maybe... maybe you could argue that if Lemeiux had stayed healthy he could have matched Gretzky. But he didn't.

astrosfan64

01-24-2006, 03:09 PM

You have to have Ore and Howe on the list.

vtbub

01-24-2006, 03:14 PM

I'd have him equal with Orr for 3rd. They both dominated their era's, but were injured too much. Where Mario shines is in the department of what he gave back to the game.

As a player, he is 98% of Wayne.

primelord

01-24-2006, 03:32 PM

I think Jean Beliveau is in the discussion somewhere, but further down (though ahead of, say, Messier).

Perhaps, but that's a part of the game. You could say that Terrell Davis would have been better than Jim Brown or Walter Payton if he didn't run into injury problems, but you'll never know. For the few years he was healthy, he was just as good. I realize Lemieux played far more years, but the concept is the same.

As for the 'offensive era' argument against Gretzky. You can easily argue that the Oilers team was responsible for the booming offensive of the 80s. In the late 70s with the Flyers and early 80s with the Islanders, you didn't have a very offensive era. The Oilers just scored like crazy and other teams had to open it up to even compete with them.
To answer the first part of your question I wasn't using Lemieux's injuries as an excuse. I was just stating a fact that it is what has hurt him the most in this debate. So I am not arguing that we should excuse it. I was just pointing out that in many people's minds there is no comparison between the two and I think that is the biggest reason why.

And for the offensive ERA I didn't have time to run through the numbers as thoroughly as I wanted to, but from 80 to 87 wehn Gretzky left the OIlers the league averaged 3.8 goals per game after you took out the Oilers production. I then started to run Lemeiuxs numbers. Between 86 and 85 which is as far as I got the league averaged 3.6 goals per game. And that was not even taking the Penguins out of the equation and they were geenrally mognth tops in the league in goals in the early 90s. Assuming I removed them it would likely be in the 3.5 range and would continue to fall after 95. So I think it is pretty clear to say Gretzky's prime was in a more offensive era even without the player's own teams in the mix.

MIJB#19

01-24-2006, 03:35 PM

What is this hockey you speak of?
hxxp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey (hxxp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_hockey)

primelord

01-24-2006, 03:38 PM

I understand what you are getting at... just wanted to mention that if you are comparing points for a game for both you cannot take Gretzky's latter years into account. I can only assume that Lemieux would have declined some in his last years. I am also not a fan of what-ifs. Lets compare actual known quantities. Also, it's hard if not impossible to estimate what Lemieux would have done with better talent around him. he didn't have it so that doesn't enter into my equation.

I agree that the chasm is not as wide as most think, but the chasm is still there.
He has declined some in his last years. And that was taken into account in his numbers as well. If you were going to chop off some years on Gretzky then wouldn;t you need to estimate the prime years Lemieux missed? It's not fair in the averages to only take Gretzky's best years and not give Lemeiuex at least some credit for what he would have done if not missing so much time.

In the end I think it is best tp just say for the total number of games they played each player averaged X number of points. And again when Gretzky was averaging 2.5 points per game he was doing it in a more offensive period and on an insanely loaded team.

Sure it is impossible to say for certain how either player would have done if the roles had been reversed, but you have to make assuptions when you are having these debates. It is not fair to either player to not try and balance the situations out.

st.cronin

01-24-2006, 05:28 PM

The only reason somebody would give an answer other than "Gretzky" is to show off their hockey knowledge. Gretzky is like Babe Ruth - everybody likes to argue that somebody else was better than him, but there's no agreement on who the main contender is.

timmae

01-24-2006, 05:47 PM

a more interesting poll would be "Who's the best 'Goon' of all time?". Which, of course, the answer would be Bob Probert;)

Grammaticus

01-24-2006, 08:42 PM

Is this a joke? Whoe other than Gretzky could you even think about as the greatest?

primelord

01-24-2006, 08:46 PM

Is this a joke? Whoe other than Gretzky could you even think about as the greatest?
Mario Lemieux

Grammaticus

01-24-2006, 08:47 PM

Mario Lemieux
Lemieux may be great, but he is not even close to the greatest.

mckerney

01-24-2006, 08:53 PM

Phil Kessel

(I'm biased and an idiot)

Pumpy Tudors

01-24-2006, 09:13 PM

a more interesting poll would be "Who's the best 'Goon' of all time?". Which, of course, the answer would be Bob Probert;)comedy randy mckay response

Grammaticus

01-24-2006, 09:20 PM

a more interesting poll would be "Who's the best 'Goon' of all time?". Which, of course, the answer would be Bob Probert;)
Kurt Rambis

Oh wait, wrong sport.

primelord

01-24-2006, 09:53 PM

Lemieux may be great, but he is not even close to the greatest.
At least you are offering some supporting evidence.

This is the problem in these types of debates. In general the people who argue that Gretzky, Ruth and Jordan were the greatest of their respective sports never really give much of an argument. Those three are just generally considered the greatest and so the rest on that.

I have made what I think is a pretty solid argument to why Lemieux is in fact very close to Gretzky (although I too believe Gretzky still has the edge). What flaw do you see in my argument other than you just think Gretzky is the greatest?

vtbub

01-24-2006, 10:18 PM

In the end, Lemieux averaged 1.88 points per game. What's more astonishing is the fact he only averaged 53.8 games per season and missed several more all together.

Dutch

01-24-2006, 10:33 PM

I can't believe Steve Trout isn't totally dominating this poll.

MizzouRah

01-24-2006, 10:33 PM

by stats, Gretzky of course, but I would have loved to see Lemieux play as many games as Gretzky did...

I they were both standing there, top shape, same age, etc.. I would draft Lemieux over Gretzky though.

bbor

01-24-2006, 10:59 PM

Orr was +92 one season......that's f'n sick.

Raven Hawk

01-25-2006, 01:58 AM

Yeah, but the definitive statistic tells all. Wayne Gretzky won 5 Lady Byng trophies to Bobby Orr's 0.

:D

saldana

01-25-2006, 02:11 AM

the only problem i have with bobby orr being in this conversation is that paul coffey, statistically, is so far above anything orr ever did as.

Mr. Wednesday

01-25-2006, 02:18 AM

Orr was +92 one season......that's f'n sick.And he was +124 in another IIRC, which is even sicker.

MrBug708

01-25-2006, 02:21 AM

I heart Ray Borque. NHL 95 style

Hurst2112

01-25-2006, 02:27 AM

heard this on ESPN radio this morning...

what if mario had played every year that he could have. Let's say he beat Gretz' records. Would Gretzky still be known as 'the great one'?

Hurst2112

01-25-2006, 02:27 AM

I heart Ray Borque. NHL 95 style

He's got nuthin on Al Iafrate's slap shot!

sachmo71

01-25-2006, 08:22 AM

Gretzky is the most talented hockey player ever.

Sweed

01-25-2006, 09:40 AM

Gump Worsley anyone? :D j\k

Seriously though the first name that always comes to mind for me when talking hockey is Bobby Orr. IMHO the greatest hockey player that I've seen play.

Maple Leafs

01-25-2006, 09:44 AM

He's got nuthin on Al Iafrate's slap shot!
Al Iafrate was great. The guy was the fastest skater in the league, had the hardest shot, and no other discernible skills. Arguably the last star athelete who was also a chain smoker. And who could forget him wearing his helmet during the skills competition so that we could see the massive bald spot in the middle of his rocker hair cut.

KJDelaney

01-25-2006, 10:17 AM

Bobby Orr

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 10:40 AM

I'll enter my black-n-gold obscured opinion. Agree with what has been mentioned here so far that based on sheer numbers, who can you pick anyone other than Gretz?

I saw someone use the word dominant/dominating earlier. I'd make an argument for Lemiuex at his peak being the most dominating.

Compare Gretzky's 1985-86 season (52 G / 163 A = 215 points) to Lemiuex's 1988-89 season (85 G / 114 A = 199 points). Gretz was playing along side Jurri, Lemieux with Rob Brown. Behind Gretz was Mark Messier, behind Lemieux was Dan Quinn. The one constant was Paul Coffey-- 48G/90A = 148 pts in 79 games with Gretz. 30G/83A=113 pts in 75 games with Lemieux.

Lemieux scored nearly 1/4 (24.5% / 85 of 347) of his teams goals that year. Even using Gretz's record 92 goals in 1981-82, he had "only" 22% (92 of 417).

You can also make an arguement (purely subjective) to the overall play of the ice. Not that Lemiuex was known for laying the body...but much more apt to than Gretz. Also, Mike Lange (Pens TV voice, so yes, probably another biased source) has said several times...when necessary, Lemieux can (more could now) be the best defensive player on the ice. I'll give that both players were used on key faceoffs, while neither was a dominant player in the faceoff circle. However, Lemieux could hold the puck and skate away nearly an entire 2 minute disadvantage on the PK. His size and reach and ability to shield the puck made him more adept than Gretz in this situation.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 10:40 AM

I they were both standing there, top shape, same age, etc.. I would draft Lemieux over Gretzky though.

Exactly...that's why Gretzky is the greatest...he was and is a runt (physically speaking) and found a way to put up ridiculous numbers despite that fact. Lemieux, on the otherhand, could physical manhandle just about anybody he wanted to and if he didn't want to bother with that, he'd just skate right by them.

Lemieux probably realized his potential, but Gretzky GREATLY exceeded his.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 10:49 AM

the only problem i have with bobby orr being in this conversation is that paul coffey, statistically, is so far above anything orr ever did as.

I'm a Paul Coffey fan (actually, he is a cousin), but there is no Paul Coffey without Bobby Orr. Statistically, actually Orr has better points per game (1.39 to 1.09), but I won't deny that Coffey didn't put up some ridiculous numbers and not just with the Oilers.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 10:57 AM

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

OldGiants

01-25-2006, 11:16 AM

If Gordie Howe played against today's players, he'd be hardpressed to score more than 20 goals in a season. But that's because he's pushing 78 and has slowed down a little.

Warhammer

01-25-2006, 11:25 AM

Don't forget what Gretzky did for the Kings after he left the Oilers. He basically carried that team to the 93 Finals and they would have won, if not for Marty "F'n" Mc Sorely.

st.cronin

01-25-2006, 11:46 AM

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

argument over

Warhammer

01-25-2006, 12:29 PM

Lemieux scored nearly 1/4 (24.5% / 85 of 347) of his teams goals that year. Even using Gretz's record 92 goals in 1981-82, he had "only" 22% (92 of 417).

So wait, while Lemieux had pretty much nothing except him on his team, he only scored 24.5% of his team's goals. While Gretzky with all the talent on his team, still scored 22% of his teams goals? Give me the Great One.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 12:36 PM

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

Based on that argument...Kurt Warner has 2 Assoc Press (I guess that is the officially recognized MVP award?) NFL MVP awards, and Jerry Rice has none. So Kurt Warner was a better player?

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 12:49 PM

So wait, while Lemieux had pretty much nothing except him on his team, he only scored 24.5% of his team's goals. While Gretzky with all the talent on his team, still scored 22% of his teams goals? Give me the Great One.

Your wording of 'Gretzky with all the talent on the team'...was the original point. Opponents had to worry about not only the players along side Gretz (Kurri)...but also the next line rolled our (Messier). Was any opposing coach worried about Rob Brown, or not having a top checking line to go again Dan Quinn?

Johnny93g

01-25-2006, 12:52 PM

Don't forget what Gretzky did for the Kings after he left the Oilers. He basically carried that team to the 93 Finals and they would have won, if not for Marty "F'n" Mc Sorely.

Kings only made the finals because of Kerry "F'n" Fraser

GreenMonster

01-25-2006, 12:53 PM

Based on that argument...Kurt Warner has 2 Assoc Press (I guess that is the officially recognized MVP award?) NFL MVP awards, and Jerry Rice has none. So Kurt Warner was a better player?

If they had any MVP award for just WR's, Rice would have plenty. Given that they only give 1 MVP a year to the best player, Warner had 2 all-world years and won MVP, Rice had 14+ all-world years with no MVP's. Rice is still the better player. Gretz was the best player in the leageu 9 out of 10 years, regardless of position.

DeToxRox

01-25-2006, 12:56 PM

the only problem i have with bobby orr being in this conversation is that paul coffey, statistically, is so far above anything orr ever did as.

But look how long Coffey played and how long Orr played. Orr retired at 32, when many guys are still in their prime.

DeToxRox

01-25-2006, 01:00 PM

Dola

Bobby Orr: 657 GP, 270 G, 645 A, 953 PT
Paul Coffey: 1409 GP, 396 G, 1135 A, 1531 PT

More then twice the games played, not even twice as many goals and assists.

BuffaloHuskey

01-25-2006, 01:00 PM

Dominik Hasek

Year Team GP Min GA SO AVG W L T
1990-91 Chicago Blackhawks 5 195 8 0 2.46 3 0 1
1991-92 Chicago Blackhawks 20 1014 44 1 2.60 10 4 1
1992-93 Buffalo Sabres 28 1429 75 0 3.15 11 10 4
1993-94 Buffalo Sabres 58 3358 109 7 1.95 30 20 6
1994-95 Buffalo Sabres 41 2416 85 5 2.11 19 14 7
1995-96 Buffalo Sabres 59 3417 161 2 2.83 22 30 6
1996-97 Buffalo Sabres 67 4037 153 5 2.27 37 20 10
1997-98 Buffalo Sabres 72 4220 147 13 2.09 33 23 13
1998-99 Buffalo Sabres 64 3817 119 9 1.87 30 18 14
1999-00 Buffalo Sabres 35 2066 76 3 2.21 15 11 6
2000-01 Buffalo Sabres 67 3904 137 11 2.11 37 24 4
2001-02 Detroit Red Wings 65 3872 140 5 2.17 41 15 8
2002-03 Did Not Play N/A
2003-04 Detroit Red Wings 14 816 30 2 2.21 8 3 2
NHL Totals 595 34561 1274 63 2.31 296 192 82

Trophies
George Vezina Trophy - 6 (1994, 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001)
William M. Jennings Trophy - 2 (1994, 2001)
Lester B. Pearson Trophy - 2 (1997, 1998)
Hart Memorial Trophy - 2 (1997, 1998)

Championships
Stanley Cup - 1 (2002)

Ken Dryden

Montreal Canadiens NHL 6 327 6 0 0 9 1.65 0
71-72 Montreal Canadiens NHL 64 3800 39 8 15 142 2.24 8
72-73 Canada SUMMIT SERIES 4 240 2 2 0 19 4.75 0
Montreal Canadiens NHL 54 3165 33 7 13 119 2.26 6
74-75 Montreal Canadiens NHL 56 3320 30 9 16 149 2.69 4
75-76 Montreal Canadiens NHL 62 3580 42 10 8 121 2.03 8
76-77 Montreal Canadiens NHL 56 3275 41 6 8 117 2.14 10
77-78 Montreal Canadiens NHL 52 3071 37 7 7 105 2.05 5
78-79 Montreal Canadiens NHL 47 2814 30 10 7 108 2.30 5
NHL All-Stars CHALLENGE CUP 2 120 1 1 0 7 3.50 0
EIGHT (8) NHL SEASONS 397 23352 258 57 74 870 2.24 46

6 Stanley Cups and 5 Vezina's.

These two should be in the argument as well.

Warhammer

01-25-2006, 01:02 PM

Your wording of 'Gretzky with all the talent on the team'...was the original point. Opponents had to worry about not only the players along side Gretz (Kurri)...but also the next line rolled our (Messier). Was any opposing coach worried about Rob Brown, or not having a top checking line to go again Dan Quinn?

Yeah, but the way hockey is played is not like football where you just match up your best player against their best player. Flip the RDE to LDE to take advantage of a match up.

In hockey, you have to match up lines against each other. From that vantage point, the fact that Messier is the back up center has no bearing on what you are doing against Gretzky. Heck, most teams had only one checking line anyway.

Let's not forget either that for many years, Lemieux some guy named Jagr on his wing.

GreenMonster

01-25-2006, 01:04 PM

If career totals mean anything in the greatest player agruement..

Gretzky assists = 1963
Lemieux total points = 1723

Gretzky is also the leading scorer of all-time..

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 01:10 PM

If they had any MVP award for just WR's, Rice would have plenty. Given that they only give 1 MVP a year to the best player, Warner had 2 all-world years and won MVP, Rice had 14+ all-world years with no MVP's. Rice is still the better player. Gretz was the best player in the leageu 9 out of 10 years, regardless of position.

I don't agree being named MVP = being the best player though. Especially in this argument. The original line I quoted said:

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

I am not arguing whether or not Gretz was great those years, clearly he was. Look at the numbers. I am arguing that citing MVP trophies doesn't automatically make him the best player. As you just said, Warner was out of his mind 2 years, but that didn't make him a better player than Rice, just more valuable to his team...

GreenMonster

01-25-2006, 01:13 PM

These two should be in the argument as well.

I have a hard time including goalies with all other players. It would be interesting argueing over the greatest goalie of all-time because those 2 are great..

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 01:14 PM

Let's not forget either that for many years, Lemieux some guy named Jagr on his wing.

Not forgetting that...but remember, Jagr didn't start to play on his wing until like 1993...by which point, hockey had become more like water-skiing on ice, dragging guys along with you. I know you can't really compare the eras...but that sadly is the truth. Like this entire argument, you can only speculate what sort of totals Lemieux-Jagr would have had playing in the mid-80's instead of the mid-90's.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 01:19 PM

I have a hard time including goalies with all other players. It would be interesting argueing over the greatest goalie of all-time because those 2 are great..

I agree with you here...to me, very similar when you start comparing defensive players when Heisman hype starts...or (totally unrealistic) an offensive lineman. Who is to say Orlando Pace wasn't the best player in the country in 1997? But you can't quantify that like you can offensive numbers, and to a lesser degree, defensive numbers.

Prior to the rule changes (or better wording, calling the old rules)...Marty Brodeur was probably the most dominant NHLer in the last handful of seasons. But how do you compare his stats to a skaters stats?

Dblbogey31

01-25-2006, 02:31 PM

Pat La..La..La..La..Lafontaine is the greatest American born player ever.

The Great One would be the greatest of All Time

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 02:32 PM

Based on that argument...Kurt Warner has 2 Assoc Press (I guess that is the officially recognized MVP award?) NFL MVP awards, and Jerry Rice has none. So Kurt Warner was a better player?

Now you are comparing apples to oranges...yes, Kurt Warner was a better QB than Jerry Rice...but, Jerry Rice was a better WR than Kurt Warner.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 02:34 PM

Your wording of 'Gretzky with all the talent on the team'...was the original point. Opponents had to worry about not only the players along side Gretz (Kurri)...but also the next line rolled our (Messier). Was any opposing coach worried about Rob Brown, or not having a top checking line to go again Dan Quinn?

Yes, in Edmonton, Gretzky had the better team when all the kids matured, but you are kidding yourself if you thought opposing coaches were worried about Messier's line beating them...they were playing their top checking line and best defensive defensemen against Gretzky and Kurri EVERY shift...same goes for Lemieux et al.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 02:34 PM

Now you are comparing apples to oranges...yes, Kurt Warner was a better QB than Jerry Rice...but, Jerry Rice was a better WR than Kurt Warner.

No I am not....where does the rule say the NFL MVP must be a QB? I am comparing football player to football player. In the main argument, Gretz and Lemiuex just happen to be C's. What about Orr though? Or, as someone mentioned earlier, goalies? They all can still win MVPs.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 02:36 PM

Yes, in Edmonton, Gretzky had the better team when all the kids matured, but you are kidding yourself if you thought opposing coaches were worried about Messier's line beating them...they were playing their top checking line and best defensive defensemen against Gretzky and Kurri EVERY shift...same goes for Lemieux et al.

OK...still Gretz/Kurri or Lemieux/Rob Brown? Both those pairs on the ice, how many coaches worried about Rob Brown beating them?

fantastic flying froggies

01-25-2006, 02:37 PM

Don't know much about hockey, my own favorite would be Ray Bourque, but the all time best has to be Gretzky, no?

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 02:46 PM

Not forgetting that...but remember, Jagr didn't start to play on his wing until like 1993...by which point, hockey had become more like water-skiing on ice, dragging guys along with you. I know you can't really compare the eras...but that sadly is the truth. Like this entire argument, you can only speculate what sort of totals Lemieux-Jagr would have had playing in the mid-80's instead of the mid-90's.

If we are going to go into the what ifs...then, what if the Oilers of the 80's stay together until they retire?? Add another 1000 pts to Gretzky's already astounding totals and probably another 4 or 5 Stanley Cup banners.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 02:52 PM

If we are going to go into the what ifs...then, what if the Oilers of the 80's stay together until they retire?? Add another 1000 pts to Gretzky's already astounding totals and probably another 4 or 5 Stanley Cup banners.

What if the Oilers had stayed in the WHA?

I did add in the original post that it is ALL speculation.

tarcone

01-25-2006, 02:53 PM

you guys are missing the fact that the NHL retired #99, so no team will ever have a #99 on their roster. seems to me that the league recognizes gretzky as the greatest ever...as i dont think any other #s have been retired by the league

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 02:56 PM

GreenMonster

01-25-2006, 02:59 PM

1 Wayne Gretzky 2857
2 Mark Messier 1887
3 Gordie Howe 1850
4 Ron Francis 1798
5 Marcel Dionne 1771
6 Steve Yzerman 1734
7 Mario Lemieux 1723

That is why the NHL retired #99..

ISiddiqui

01-25-2006, 03:01 PM

And for the offensive ERA I didn't have time to run through the numbers as thoroughly as I wanted to, but from 80 to 87 wehn Gretzky left the OIlers the league averaged 3.8 goals per game after you took out the Oilers production. I then started to run Lemeiuxs numbers. Between 86 and 85 which is as far as I got the league averaged 3.6 goals per game. And that was not even taking the Penguins out of the equation and they were geenrally mognth tops in the league in goals in the early 90s. Assuming I removed them it would likely be in the 3.5 range and would continue to fall after 95. So I think it is pretty clear to say Gretzky's prime was in a more offensive era even without the player's own teams in the mix.
You are misunderstanding. I'm arguing that Gretzky and the Oilers' offensive prowess made other teams in the league focus more on offensive, leading to an offensive era. When Gretzky is scoring 92 goals or 215 points, you can't focus on defense, you have to try to outscore them. In that way, Gretzky and the Oilers were responsible for the offensive era in hockey, which is more impressive (to me) than anything Lemieux did.

And longevity counts. People can say all they want about Sandy Koufax and how great he was in his prime. Walter Johnson is still better, and part of that is the amount of years he pitched.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 03:21 PM

No I am not....where does the rule say the NFL MVP must be a QB? I am comparing football player to football player. In the main argument, Gretz and Lemiuex just happen to be C's. What about Orr though? Or, as someone mentioned earlier, goalies? They all can still win MVPs.

Sure, a WR has just as much of a right to win the AP MVP award as a QB, but how many WRs have won it?? I'll tell you, none (there have been a couple who've won MVP awards by other "voters", not the AP). Why?? I don't know, I guess the AP feel that a WR's value is less than that of a QB's...right or not, that's the way it is. Sure, you can compare a QB with a WR but because their stats are so different, it's tough to make a fair comparison. Is a passing TD more valuable than a receiving TD?? Are passing yards more valuable than receiving yards?? I guess it's in the eye of the beholder, right??

Sure, in hockey, any position can win the Hart Trophy and every position has won it in the past...but, the fact still remains that Gretz has more of them on his mantle than anybody else. Does that mean he was the best player that year?? You'll say not necessarily so, but if you can find a better candidate during those years, I'm all ears.

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 03:32 PM

Sure, a WR has just as much of a right to win the AP MVP award as a QB, but how many WRs have won it?? I'll tell you, none (there have been a couple who've won MVP awards by other "voters", not the AP). Why?? I don't know, I guess the AP feel that a WR's value is less than that of a QB's...right or not, that's the way it is. Sure, you can compare a QB with a WR but because their stats are so different, it's tough to make a fair comparison. Is a passing TD more valuable than a receiving TD?? Are passing yards more valuable than receiving yards?? I guess it's in the eye of the beholder, right??

So are you saying that the player chosen as MVP is not always neccesarily the BEST player overall, but (as the name states) the MOST VALUABLE overall?

Butter

01-25-2006, 03:41 PM

Pittsburgh media is already on this one...pushing for #66 to get the same treatment.
Big surprise there. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

st.cronin

01-25-2006, 03:57 PM

I consider Patrick Roy the greatest goalie of my lifetime, not Hasek or Brodeur.

BuffaloHuskey

01-25-2006, 04:11 PM

st.cronin

01-25-2006, 04:13 PM

Dryden is most definitely a legend, with a good argument as best ever. He's a bit before my time, though.

Dr. Sak

01-25-2006, 04:21 PM

Why isnt Wyndell Clark on this list?

Warhammer

01-25-2006, 04:30 PM

Why isnt Wyndell Clark on this list?

Because he wasn't the best player on his team?

Warhammer

01-25-2006, 04:31 PM

1 Wayne Gretzky 2857
2 Mark Messier 1887
3 Gordie Howe 1850
4 Ron Francis 1798
5 Marcel Dionne 1771
6 Steve Yzerman 1734
7 Mario Lemieux 1723

That is why the NHL retired #99..

I would like to go on record as saying that Ron Francis is the most underrated player of all time.

bbor

01-25-2006, 04:36 PM

the only problem i have with bobby orr being in this conversation is that paul coffey, statistically, is so far above anything orr ever did as.

Surely you jest.Orr was 10 times the defender Coffey ever was.

vtbub

01-25-2006, 04:39 PM

Why isnt Wyndell Clark on this list?
To prepare you for the beating you will receive from certain posters from Ottawa, it's Wendell.

Don't say you weren't warned. http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

wheels

01-25-2006, 04:41 PM

I really think that hands down it has to be Dryden as the best goalie ever. Look at his GA and Stanley Cups. His Goals against with the minimal padding they wore is unbelievable.

In any case, he is a great story. He was earning his law degree at McGill when he started his professional career. I am impressed by that.I am a big Dryden fan (read his book, "The Game"), but if you're comparing pure goaltending ability independent of the team, I think Hasek is better. Dryden was very good, very rarely out of position, but he played with Larry Robinson, Guy Lapointe and other elite players of the era. I've seen Hasek make more unbelievable saves and keep his team in the game with his sheer will with considerably less talent surrounding him (except perhaps when he was on the Wings).

I realize that I'm splitting hairs here, but if I had to pick, it would be Hasek.

JeffR

01-25-2006, 04:42 PM

I really think that hands down it has to be Dryden as the best goalie ever. Look at his GA and Stanley Cups. His Goals against with the minimal padding they wore is unbelievable.

In any case, he is a great story. He was earning his law degree at McGill when he started his professional career. I am impressed by that.

I doubt most Habs fans would even name him as their team's best goalie ever; Roy and/or Plante would probably get mentioned first. It's tough to evaluate him because of the teams in front of him - four hall of famers on defence, the best defensive forward of all time, and some of the best offensive players of the 70's.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 05:04 PM

So are you saying that the player chosen as MVP is not always neccesarily the BEST player overall, but (as the name states) the MOST VALUABLE overall?

Huh?? How do you possibly differentiate the two?? This argument could go in circles for hours...so, go ahead and say that Gretzky's 9 MVP awards are useless and that there was somebody better than him those 9 years...but, as soon as you come up with the name of that guy(s), you let me know.

st.cronin

01-25-2006, 05:09 PM

I am a big Dryden fan (read his book, "The Game"), but if you're comparing pure goaltending ability independent of the team, I think Hasek is better. Dryden was very good, very rarely out of position, but he played with Larry Robinson, Guy Lapointe and other elite players of the era. I've seen Hasek make more unbelievable saves and keep his team in the game with his sheer will with considerably less talent surrounding him (except perhaps when he was on the Wings).

I realize that I'm splitting hairs here, but if I had to pick, it would be Hasek.

Hasek is almost certainly the best ATHLETE to ever play goalie, and one of the greatest goalies ever. I think Roy was better.

Honolulu_Blue

01-25-2006, 05:11 PM

Hasek is almost certainly the best ATHLETE to ever play goalie, and one of the greatest goalies ever. I think Roy was better.
Roy is, was, and always will be a bitch. Talented? Yes. But a bitch nonetheless...

Maple Leafs

01-25-2006, 05:11 PM

To prepare you for the beating you will receive from certain posters from Ottawa, it's Wendell.
It's Wendel.

Kings only made the finals because of Kerry "F'n" Fraser
(twitches)

What about Paul Coffey? Ken Dryden? Dominik Hasek?
I'd just like to say that there are some really, really terrible arguments being made in this thread.

KJDelaney

01-25-2006, 05:42 PM

Dola

Bobby Orr: 657 GP, 270 G, 645 A, 953 PT
Paul Coffey: 1409 GP, 396 G, 1135 A, 1531 PT

More then twice the games played, not even twice as many goals and assists.

Bobby Orr. Period.

What would his numbers have been if his knees didn't break down.

The "Holy Trinity" for Hockey is

Howe - Father
Gretzky - Son
Orr - Holy Spirit.

Not coffey, not hasek, (couldn't hold Dryden's jock), not Tretiak (although, he was GREAT.

Mario is/should be top 3. But, who would you remove.

ScottVib

01-25-2006, 07:36 PM

Gordie Howe

Suburban Rhythm

01-25-2006, 07:57 PM

Huh?? How do you possibly differentiate the two?? This argument could go in circles for hours...so, go ahead and say that Gretzky's 9 MVP awards are useless and that there was somebody better than him those 9 years...but, as soon as you come up with the name of that guy(s), you let me know.

Why can't you differentiate between the two? We just covered before that Jerry Rice has never won an MVP award. But he is no doubt the greatest WR ever, and head and shoulders above plenty of other guys who have won MVPs. My argument is the award is called Most Valuable Player...not Best Player in the League trophy.

Not sure where I said his Harts are useless. I just don't see using them for a basis to say he's the best ever. The award itself is subjective by the writers selecting it's winner.

ScottVib

01-25-2006, 08:39 PM

What if the Oilers had stayed in the WHA?

I did add in the original post that it is ALL speculation.

Take it another way, what if the Indianapolis Racers never folded prior to the WHA's demise... Gretzky would have never been in Edmonton.

st.cronin

01-25-2006, 08:41 PM

Well, if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

johnnyshaka

01-25-2006, 08:56 PM

Why can't you differentiate between the two? We just covered before that Jerry Rice has never won an MVP award. But he is no doubt the greatest WR ever, and head and shoulders above plenty of other guys who have won MVPs. My argument is the award is called Most Valuable Player...not Best Player in the League trophy.

Why is Jerry Rice the greatest receiver ever and why is there no doubt?? Is it because of his amazing stats?? The longevity of his career?? The number of Super Bowls he won?? Hmmm...sounds pretty familiar.

Not sure where I said his Harts are useless. I just don't see using them for a basis to say he's the best ever. The award itself is subjective by the writers selecting it's winner.

This whole discussion is subjective, what's your point?? If you want to take the subjectivity out of it, then have a look at the stats and record books and then tell me that Mario outshines Wayne and I'll politely call you a liar.

primelord

01-25-2006, 09:56 PM

You are misunderstanding. I'm arguing that Gretzky and the Oilers' offensive prowess made other teams in the league focus more on offensive, leading to an offensive era. When Gretzky is scoring 92 goals or 215 points, you can't focus on defense, you have to try to outscore them. In that way, Gretzky and the Oilers were responsible for the offensive era in hockey, which is more impressive (to me) than anything Lemieux did.

And longevity counts. People can say all they want about Sandy Koufax and how great he was in his prime. Walter Johnson is still better, and part of that is the amount of years he pitched.
I still disagree with this. The death of offense in hockey was not so much a shift to a heavy focus on defense. It was a shift to big unskilled guys who clutch and grab in the neutral zone and grind the game to a halt. You also had the introduction of ridiculous sized goalie pads. Gretzky didn't face these things in Edmonton.

I certainly agree longevity counts. However I believe Lemieux played enough that the longevity shouldn;t count heavily against him even though it does in most people's minds. In your example Koufax only had 4 truly dominant years. Lemieux on the other hand had over 100 points 10 years. SO it isn;t like Koufax or Gale Syares or Terrell Davis who had short bursts of brillance and then were cut down before we could know for certain how greatvthey really were.

Lemieux was dominant for over a decade. He just doesn't stack up in total points because of his injuries, but it isn;t like we don;t for sure just how good he was. Should just total production really be what we judge this on? Does anyone truely believe that Jerome Bettus and Curtis Martin were better running backs than Jim Brown just because they played longer and had more yards?

Just to make it very clear. I think Gretzky is the greatest player ever in hockey. I am not making the argument that Lemieux is better. However I keep seeing comments along the lines of "It isn't even close". The total numbers don't tell the whole story.

KJDelaney

01-25-2006, 10:06 PM

Well, if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

Well put.

RendeR

01-25-2006, 10:36 PM

At least you are offering some supporting evidence.

This is the problem in these types of debates. In general the people who argue that Gretzky, Ruth and Jordan were the greatest of their respective sports never really give much of an argument. Those three are just generally considered the greatest and so the rest on that.

I have made what I think is a pretty solid argument to why Lemieux is in fact very close to Gretzky (although I too believe Gretzky still has the edge). What flaw do you see in my argument other than you just think Gretzky is the greatest?
Gretsky elevated the players around him(see la kings after his arrival)

Lemieux never showed that ability.(see weak seasons for Penguins even with Mario healthy)

Gretsky is the single greatest Hockey plyer to date in the NHL.

JeffNights

01-26-2006, 01:14 AM

1 Wayne Gretzky 2857
2 Mark Messier 1887
3 Gordie Howe 1850
4 Ron Francis 1798
5 Marcel Dionne 1771
6 Steve Yzerman 1734
7 Mario Lemieux 1723

That is why the NHL retired #99..

Breaking momentarily from the subject, man I really want Stevie to pass Ron Francis...Fucking Lockout year ruined that, dammit. I have no problems being behind Marcel Dionne, but Ron Francis? Nah...

primelord

01-26-2006, 02:00 AM

Lemieux never showed that ability.(see weak seasons for Penguins even with Mario healthy)
What a silly statement.

In the 89-90 season the Kings were 34-39-7 2nd to last in their division. Gretzky had 142 points that season. In the 93-94 season they were 27-45-12 and Gretzky had 130 points again second to last in their division. In the shortened season of 94-95 they were third to last in their division despite Gretzky having 48 points in 48 games. In 95-96 they finished second to last despite Gretzky again leading the team in points before he was traded 62 games in.

In total the Kings had a below .500 record for the entire time Gretzky was there. I made sure to post his point totals in the really bad seasons just to show that it can't be blamed on him falling off. When you play on a crappy team there is only so much you can do. Trying to say that Lemieux didn;t make his teammates better just because they had some poor seasons is just silly. If that is the case why isn't the same thing being said about Gretzky on some of these awful Kings teams?

If you don't think Lemieux made the players around him better then you flat out were not watching him play in the early to mid 90s.

Karim

01-26-2006, 02:03 AM

I think you need to look at games played to put the point totals into context:

1 Wayne Gretzky 2857(1487)
2 Mark Messier 1887(1756)
3 Gordie Howe 1850(1767)
4 Ron Francis 1798(1731)
5 Marcel Dionne 1771(1348)
6 Steve Yzerman 1734(1484)
7 Mario Lemieux 1723(915)

Other notables for comparison:
Bobby Orr 915(657)
Raymond Bourque 1579(1612)
Paul Coffey 1531(1409)
Maurice Richard 965(978)
Jean Believeau 1219(1125)
Phil Esposito 1590(1282)
Mike Bossy 1126(752)
Guy Lafleur 1353(1127)
Joe Sakic 1452(1205)
Bobby Hull 1170(1063)

johnnyshaka

01-26-2006, 02:11 AM

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 07:40 AM

Why is Jerry Rice the greatest receiver ever and why is there no doubt?? Is it because of his amazing stats?? The longevity of his career?? The number of Super Bowls he won?? Hmmm...sounds pretty familiar.

This whole discussion is subjective, what's your point?? If you want to take the subjectivity out of it, then have a look at the stats and record books and then tell me that Mario outshines Wayne and I'll politely call you a liar.

So how can you argue that Gretz is the best ever because he won 9 Harts in 10 years...and then say Rice is the best ever DESPITE never winning one MVP? Gretz was a great player, therefore won MVPs. But winning MVPs does not make you a great player. See Kurt Warner.

A player can be the most valuable to his team without being it's premier player. I realize this is not a league-wide situation etc, but Casey Hamtpon (Steelers NT) was recognized by his teammates as team MVP. He is not the most talented player on the defense (Polamalu, Farrior, Porter, Aaron Smith)...but he is valuable to making that defense work.

I am not arguing this point-- Gretzky had the best career. My initial statement was you can make a case for Lemieux to be, overall, more dominating at his peak.

GreenMonster

01-26-2006, 08:01 AM

I am not arguing this point-- Gretzky had the best career. My initial statement was you can make a case for Lemieux to be, overall, more dominating at his peak.

I can see where your going with this but no. Gretzky's best 5 year run was still better than Lemieux. Lemieux was a better 2 way player, but Gretzky no doubt the better passer and about equal on scoring.

1036 points in 5 years is down-right scary..

Warhammer

01-26-2006, 08:39 AM

Roy is, was, and always will be a bitch. Talented? Yes. But a bitch nonetheless...

He can't hear you, he has two Stanley Cup Rings in his ears.

johnnyshaka

01-26-2006, 09:11 AM

So how can you argue that Gretz is the best ever because he won 9 Harts in 10 years...and then say Rice is the best ever DESPITE never winning one MVP? Gretz was a great player, therefore won MVPs. But winning MVPs does not make you a great player. See Kurt Warner.

Never said Jerry Rice was the best ever, you did. I'm asking YOU why YOU say he's the best ever.

Maybe you should reread this thread from the beginning. I don't think that Gretzky's 9 Hart Trophies ARE the reason he's better, I've stated several times why I think Wayne is better...I just think it helps his case when whoever votes for those awards recognized him as being the MVP for NINE years straight. That's NINE straight years...that's a pretty impressive peak period. Lemieux didn't even play for NINE straight seasons.

A player can be the most valuable to his team without being it's premier player. I realize this is not a league-wide situation etc, but Casey Hamtpon (Steelers NT) was recognized by his teammates as team MVP. He is not the most talented player on the defense (Polamalu, Farrior, Porter, Aaron Smith)...but he is valuable to making that defense work.

Now, whether you agree with how the award is given out is not the issue here, because they are never going to give the Hart to a shot blocking defenseman who scores 5 goals...you'll never see it, even if you think he's the reason his team won the division.

Honolulu_Blue

01-26-2006, 09:39 AM

He can't hear you, he has two Stanley Cup Rings in his ears.I can think of another place he could stick those Stanley Cup rings...

Just because it makes me happen to mention it...

Roy's last game as a Montreal Canadien:

December 2, 1995. Roy let in 9 goals on 26 shots before being benched in a 12-1 shellacking by the Detroit Red Wings.

Roy's last playoff game against the Wings:

Game 7 of the 2002 Western Conference finals. Roy allows 6 goals on 16 shots before being benched in a 7-0 shellacking by... you guessed it, the Detroit Red Wings.

He who laughs last, laughs best.

Hee hee!

:p

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 10:10 AM

Never said Jerry Rice was the best ever, you did. I'm asking YOU why YOU say he's the best ever.

Maybe you should reread this thread from the beginning. I don't think that Gretzky's 9 Hart Trophies ARE the reason he's better, I've stated several times why I think Wayne is better...I just think it helps his case when whoever votes for those awards recognized him as being the MVP for NINE years straight. That's NINE straight years...that's a pretty impressive peak period. Lemieux didn't even play for NINE straight seasons.

But I believe you agreed Rice was better than Warner, eventhough Warner has 2 more MVPs than him. No?

I'm reading it as 'Gretz is better because other people said he was better 9 out of 10 years.' Maybe that was not your intention, but that was my interpretation.

johnnyshaka

01-26-2006, 10:50 AM

But I believe you agreed Rice was better than Warner, eventhough Warner has 2 more MVPs than him. No?

Nope, not once did I agree that Rice was better than Warner. What I DID say is that Rice is a better WR than Warner, but I also said that Warner was a better QB than Rice. You are the one who said that Rice was the better player and I'm still waiting to hear why you say he is better than Warner and the best receiver ever.

I'm reading it as 'Gretz is better because other people said he was better 9 out of 10 years.' Maybe that was not your intention, but that was my interpretation.

I said it HELPS HIS CASE...it's right there, in plain english, no interpretation necessary.

Again, maybe you should reread the thread...from the beginning...because I stated, several times, why I think Gretzky is the best ever.

M GO BLUE!!!

01-26-2006, 11:15 AM

This poll is silly... Howe and Orr should be on the list as well as Sawchuck.
Agreed. Rocket too.

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 12:27 PM

I said it HELPS HIS CASE...it's right there, in plain english, no interpretation necessary.

Again, maybe you should reread the thread...from the beginning...because I stated, several times, why I think Gretzky is the best ever.

Here's what I read:

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

timmae

01-26-2006, 12:33 PM

guys... this isn't private ryan here... let the football analogy die please.

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 12:39 PM

guys... this isn't private ryan here... let the football analogy die please.

I don't think Pvt Ryan ever won an MVP...

BuffaloHuskey

01-26-2006, 01:06 PM

I'd just like to say that there are some really, really terrible arguments being made in this thread.

This quote in reference to Hasek and Dryden being considerede is a terrible statement. How can you discount these guys from being included in the argument when combined they have 11 Vezinas? I had the pleasure of watching first handm Hasek goaltend for some god awful Sabres teams and there is no way you can tell me that he was not one of the best players ever. He carried that team on his back for years and was the only reason they made the playoffs during the years he was there. The lack of success they have had since he left is evidence of that. Thankfully we now have another great netminder in Ryan Miller who will be a superstar in the league and should be starting in goal for team USA.

Dryden, although playing behind some awesome defensemen has stats which allow him to be in the discussion.

johnnyshaka

01-26-2006, 01:20 PM

Never said Jerry Rice was the best ever, you did. I'm asking YOU why YOU say he's the best ever.

Maybe you should reread this thread from the beginning. I don't think that Gretzky's 9 Hart Trophies ARE the reason he's better, I've stated several times why I think Wayne is better...I just think it helps his case when whoever votes for those awards recognized him as being the MVP for NINE years straight. That's NINE straight years...that's a pretty impressive peak period. Lemieux didn't even play for NINE straight seasons.

But I believe you agreed Rice was better than Warner, eventhough Warner has 2 more MVPs than him. No?

I'm reading IT as 'Gretz is better because other people said he was better 9 out of 10 years.' Maybe that was not your intention, but that was my interpretation.

So, what is IT referring to?? Are you referring to the quote you included in this post, which would make sense. Or are you referring to a post on another page because I'm really getting confused here?? Once you get that sorted out, let me know.

And, I'm still waiting to see why Jerry Rice is the best WR ever...on what grounds??

RendeR

01-26-2006, 01:22 PM

This quote in reference to Hasek and Dryden being considerede is a terrible statement. How can you discount these guys from being included in the argument when combined they have 11 Vezinas? I had the pleasure of watching first handm Hasek goaltend for some god awful Sabres teams and there is no way you can tell me that he was not one of the best players ever. He carried that team on his back for years and was the only reason they made the playoffs during the years he was there. The lack of success they have had since he left is evidence of that. Thankfully we now have another great netminder in Ryan Miller who will be a superstar in the league and should be starting in goal for team USA.

Dryden, although playing behind some awesome defensemen has stats which allow him to be in the discussion.
Wow, I like Miller and all, but superstar? I think you have yer hopes set a little too "hasek" high here. miller is a solid starter among goaltenders, but he's going to have to show me a LOT more "spine like a slinky" moves before I'll buy him as the cornerstone of the team.

I'm still a Biron fan too though, I thought matin would be another hasek at one time too, but he's slipped a lot. I'm loving this season for the Sabres though.

Let's Avenge the "foot in the crease" fleecing!

bbor

01-26-2006, 01:25 PM

Miller not being on the US olympic team still mystifies me.....

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 01:39 PM

I've quoted this line in several responses already:

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

Nowhere in there do you say

I said it HELPS HIS CASE...it's right there, in plain english, no interpretation necessary.

And I am not sure where I said Jerry Rice was the best WR ever. I only questioned if Kurt Warner was a better player than him, being Warner has 2 MVPs and Rice has none. Plus, there would be a difference between the best WR ever and best football player ever.

We will always disagree and interpret these differently...

Maple Leafs

01-26-2006, 01:49 PM

This quote in reference to Hasek and Dryden being considerede is a terrible statement. How can you discount these guys from being included in the argument when combined they have 11 Vezinas? I had the pleasure of watching first handm Hasek goaltend for some god awful Sabres teams and there is no way you can tell me that he was not one of the best players ever. He carried that team on his back for years and was the only reason they made the playoffs during the years he was there. The lack of success they have had since he left is evidence of that. Thankfully we now have another great netminder in Ryan Miller who will be a superstar in the league and should be starting in goal for team USA.

Dryden, although playing behind some awesome defensemen has stats which allow him to be in the discussion.
You could make a case for Hasek as the top goalie of all time. It might be a bit of a stretch when you look at the careers of guys like Roy and Sawchuk among others, but it's not unreasonable.

But greatest player of all time? Alongside Gretzky, Orr, Howe and Lemeiux? Not even close. Sorry, but you're wearing your homer goggles if you think he belongs in that group.

And Dryden isn't even a serious candidate for best goalie. If Hasek isn't in the best player ballpark, Dryden isn't even in the same zip code.

Johnny93g

01-26-2006, 01:49 PM

Roy's last game in the NHL:

Game 7 of the 2002 Western Conference finals. Roy allows 6 goals on 16 shots before being benched in a 7-0 shellacking by... you guessed it, the Detroit Red Wings.

He who laughs last, laughs best.

Hee hee!

:p

Roy's last NHL game was an ot loss to the Wild in game 7 of the Minnesota/Colorado 1st round playoff series. Im 99.9% sure of this. Andrew Burnette scored.

BuffaloHuskey

01-26-2006, 02:19 PM

Comparison of Roy vs. Hasek

Career GA Hasek 2.22 Roy 2.54
Career Shutouts Hasek 67 and counting Roy 66
Vezina Trophies Hasek 6, Roy 3
Stanely Cups - Roy 3, Hasek 1
Winning % - Roy 63%, Hasek 62%
Save % - Hasek 92.4% Roy 91%

I think a majority of people in this forum would say that Roy is the best goaltender ever (which of course in influenced by Canadian bias on the game the same way American born players in baseball are more hyped than Latinos). So why would the best goaltender ever not be considered in the best players argument. That does not make a whole lot of sense to me.

The stats above seem to favor Hasek as the better goalie between Hasek and Roy, especially factoring how weak the Sabres talent was during most of Hasek's tenure but it is close and debatable. Based on the stats, it appears to me that Hasek is the better of the two goalies and thus the best goalie ever. I just don't think you can dismiss the best player at his position from being in the argument of best player (I am not saying is the best player but I think he would be rightfully included.

Honolulu_Blue

01-26-2006, 02:20 PM

Roy's last NHL game was an ot loss to the Wild in game 7 of the Minnesota/Colorado 1st round playoff series. Im 99.9% sure of this. Andrew Burnette scored.
You should 100% sure, as you're quite right. He did play an entire season after his embarassing blowout loss to the Wings in '02. Problem with living in Europe all that time. Things get quite foggy. ;)

johnnyshaka

01-26-2006, 02:32 PM

And I am not sure where I said Jerry Rice was the best WR ever. I only questioned if Kurt Warner was a better player than him, being Warner has 2 MVPs and Rice has none. Plus, there would be a difference between the best WR ever and best football player ever.

I think this covers it.

But he is no doubt the greatest WR ever, and head and shoulders above plenty of other guys who have won MVPs.

I've quoted this line in several responses already:

Oh...I don't think that this has been mentioned yet...but 9 Hart Trophies (MVP) in 10 years compared to 2. I'd say that's pretty dominent.

Nowhere in there do you say

I said it HELPS HIS CASE...it's right there, in plain english, no interpretation necessary.

No kidding, because you should probably be looking at the quote you originally quoted when you made your comment about interpretation.

So, I went looking for what the Hart trophy was actually for and it turns out that on several sites it says it's for the MVP of the league and other sites say it is for the MVP of their team. Interesting. So, if the first definition is true, would the MVP in terms of the entire league not mean the best player in the league??

Also, if you look at the stats of the winners, of the last 45 years or so, 27 of the 45 winners led the league in points (or GAA for goalies)...including all of Wayne's seasons, but one, and both of Mario's. So, if you lead the league in points and won the Hart Trophy as the MVP of either the league or your team, would it be fair to assume that during those seasons when both of these conditions are true, the Hart Trophy winner was the best player in the league??

Johnny93g

01-26-2006, 02:36 PM

You know, id take Terry Sawchuck over both Roy and Hasek every day of the week, but i dont think any goalie has been good enough to be considered a better player then any of the big 4...

BuffaloHuskey

01-26-2006, 02:50 PM

The reason I did not include Sawchuk in my comparision with Roy and Hasek is that he played in a different era, which would make it hard to compare his stats to the other two. From what I know of Sawchuk (mainly through my father's impressions) is that he was great as well.

KJDelaney

01-26-2006, 02:59 PM

Suburban Rhythm

01-26-2006, 03:35 PM

I think this covers it.
You have me...I honestly don't remember typing that, but it's there...
Why is Rice the best? Yes, he has great stats, but there is also how it effected those around him. Did him drawing double teams make, leaving John Taylor in single coverage, make Taylor a better weapon? Did teams needing to leave safeties deep help Roger Craig, Ricky Watters, etc in the running game? Did Joe Montana/Steve Young benefit from him turning 5 yard slants into 75 yard TDs?

No kidding, because you should probably be looking at the quote you originally quoted when you made your comment about interpretation.

But I was quoting the first one from when you originally posted it. THAT was where my argument was....yes you clarified it later.

So, I went looking for what the Hart trophy was actually for and it turns out that on several sites it says it's for the MVP of the league and other sites say it is for the MVP of their team. Interesting. So, if the first definition is true, would the MVP in terms of the entire league not mean the best player in the league??

Also, if you look at the stats of the winners, of the last 45 years or so, 27 of the 45 winners led the league in points (or GAA for goalies)...including all of Wayne's seasons, but one, and both of Mario's. So, if you lead the league in points and won the Hart Trophy as the MVP of either the league or your team, would it be fair to assume that during those seasons when both of these conditions are true, the Hart Trophy winner was the best player in the league??

This one...I guess we will forever disagree on. Just like an offensive lineman could never win the Heisman. He may very well be "the best" at what he does, and never make a mistake all year (yeah, I know, not plausible, but for the argument). But he'd never be called the best player in the country. That teams QB/RB will have excellent numbers, but without this lineman, it never happens. Who is more valuable to his team?

Just like you said early a Dmen who scores a small number of goals and blocks alot of shots would never win the Hart. Because there is no stat to base his importance on, he won't be seen as the "best" player, but his performance on the ice can make him the most "valuable".