Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Sedins are Second to Wayne Gretzky and Jari Kurri(NHL Record)


ChuckNORRIS4Cup

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Westcoasting said:

I won't say i disagree with you as there are some amazing players right now. But when Gretz played he was so much better than everyone else... even as a 20 year old, and then he improved on that and created more space between him and other stars. Nobody at the time though Espo's 76 goals would be beaten... Gretzky got 92. I think only two had ever got 50 goals in 50 games, he did it in 39. By game 50 he had 60 something goals. And it's easy to say that scoring was easy... but how come no one else could do it. Mike Bossy one of the greatest goal scorers ever got 68 i believe. It is just so hard to compare the times but right now looking at the points race someone would have to be like 33% better than everyone else to compare.

That is implying that only one player from this era is better than Gretzky.  Gretzky was way ahead of the competition back then, but the competition wasn't that good.  Defense, goalies and defensive systems were way worse.  Yes, he was the best of the best, but that doesn't mean much when the game was so easy to score points in. If you take all the greats from that era, and put them in the current game, all the goal, assist, and point scoring records will decrease significantly.  My point is that even though he was so much better, he isn't as good as some players now.  I believe that goal scoring wise, Ovechkin is better than Gretzky, and point scoring wise Crosby is better.  McDavid maybe, but he hasn't played long enough to judge.  There is a reason why the top goal scorer can barely get 50 goals in a season now days, and I believe Gretzky would probably max out at 40.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, IBatch said:

 

Please.  Did you watch games back then?  Goalies size has more than anything to do with decreased scoring as does NJ and their trap  that caught fire with all the expansion team that had little else to win games with and the hooking and holding that crept into the game at the height of the dead puck era.  Probert played one game on cocaine and thought he was going to die throughout or so he says in his book BTW.  

Maybe scoring was up because the players themselves were better and the goalies the smaller goalies didn't drop to cover the corners everytime a player came into the zone and looked at them ( thanks for that Roy).  

They had some of the fastest players ever to play (Garnter Bure etc.) and some of the hardest shots too using wooden sticks (MacInnis Ifratre).  

Too bad hockey wasnt as exciting now as it was back then ... A 5-4 game is better than a 2-1 game anyday.

 

 

Please. I made two points. Both of which were accurate. Not sure what your argument is?

That the Oilers didn't do a shyt-tonne of Cocaine in the 80's... i certainly hope you're not arguing against that because its a well known fact. 

I already said, in an era where you had a group of players who were ahead of their time, they were literally scoring from 30' out with a 50 mph slapshot. Yeah, I've watched plenty of those games in the early 80's. Go watch some old clips of Gretzky's devastating slapper, LOL

Especially if you need a good laugh because comparing hockey then to now, it's hilarious 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Adarsh Sant said:

That is implying that only one player from this era is better than Gretzky.  Gretzky was way ahead of the competition back then, but the competition wasn't that good.  Defense, goalies and defensive systems were way worse.  Yes, he was the best of the best, but that doesn't mean much when the game was so easy to score points in. If you take all the greats from that era, and put them in the current game, all the goal, assist, and point scoring records will decrease significantly.  My point is that even though he was so much better, he isn't as good as some players now.  I believe that goal scoring wise, Ovechkin is better than Gretzky, and point scoring wise Crosby is better.  McDavid maybe, but he hasn't played long enough to judge.  There is a reason why the top goal scorer can barely get 50 goals in a season now days, and I believe Gretzky would probably max out at 40.

 

 

And that is always the problem of comparing different era's. Baseball and Soccer are maybe the two sports that haven't changed much over the years and we can compare stats. I'm with you on Ovechkin, may be the greatest goal scorer ever. I wonder how guys in the 80's would do with year round workouts and being in incredible shape how that would change their games, or skating coaches, composite sticks etc. Or how long Bobby Orr could play with todays medical knowledge.

 

On the topic of today's game i think if someone was to bust out and be consistently 20 or 30 points ahead of the rest of the pack that would be similar to what Gretzky was in his era. As far as points no one has consistently been the leader since Jagr in the dead puck era of the late 90's. Until someone wins 4 or 5 in a row its very hard to put them the category of greatest ever discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, IBatch said:

Your post suggests that the eighties and nineties were soft times. Do yourself a favour and read Gretzky's book.  It will open your mind to not only his era but the history of hockey.  Crosby is a great player no doubt he's special.  Kane not so much.  There's been plenty of players like him and better than him.  No way either of those guys top 150 playing back then where as Gretzky would adapt fine and score 150 plus in today's game. Did you watch him and hockey back then?  The best team ever by far was the 87 Canada Cup team.  Those players were something else.

Let's compare scoring in the 80's to scoring during the Sedins career:

 

From 80/81 to 89/90 (10 full years):

50+ goals was attained 75 times

100+ points was attained 118 times

 

From 00/01 to 15/16 (14 full years):

50+ goals was attained 25 times

100+ points was attained 32 times

 

Average number of players per year with 50+ goals:

80/81 to 89/90 = 7.5

00/01 to 15/16 = 1.8

 

Average number of players per year with 100+ points:

80/81 to 89/90 = 11.8

00/01 to 15/16 = 2.3

 

If you raise the bar to number of times players attained 125 points:

80/81 to 89/90 = 46

00/01 to 15/16 = 1

 

 

I honestly doubt Gretzky or Lemieux could top 150 points in today's NHL. Probably 100 points, 125 would be amazing. But 150 is pretty doubtful. Just the difference in systems and goaltending style, plus their equipment size difference. I'd be willing to wager the Sedins could have had several 100+ point seasons through the 80's though.

 

Btw, during the 80's only two players outside of Lemieux and Gretzky hit 150 pts in a season Yzerman and Nicholls each did it once.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Baggins said:

Let's compare scoring in the 80's to scoring during the Sedins career:

 

From 80/81 to 89/90 (10 full years):

50+ goals was attained 75 times

100+ points was attained 118 times

 

From 00/01 to 15/16 (14 full years):

50+ goals was attained 25 times

100+ points was attained 32 times

 

Average number of players per year with 50+ goals:

80/81 to 89/90 = 7.5

00/01 to 15/16 = 1.8

 

Average number of players per year with 100+ points:

80/81 to 89/90 = 11.8

00/01 to 15/16 = 2.3

 

If you raise the bar to number of times players attained 125 points:

80/81 to 89/90 = 46

00/01 to 15/16 = 1

 

 

I honestly doubt Gretzky or Lemieux could top 150 points in today's NHL. Probably 100 points, 125 would be amazing. But 150 is pretty doubtful. Just the difference in systems and goaltending style, plus their equipment size difference. I'd be willing to wager the Sedins could have had several 100+ point seasons through the 80's though.

 

Btw, during the 80's only two players outside of Lemieux and Gretzky hit 150 pts in a season Yzerman and Nicholls each did it once.

I believe if the Sedins played in that era of hockey, of course probably would of taken a few years to get their skates up to par and get used to the hacking and slashing, but they would of put up some big numbers. Because they have that edge of being twins and reading off each other already, something that other players need to learn with others, and with how much open ice was back then I believe they easily would of had 150+ point seasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Adarsh Sant said:

That is implying that only one player from this era is better than Gretzky.  Gretzky was way ahead of the competition back then, but the competition wasn't that good.  Defense, goalies and defensive systems were way worse.  Yes, he was the best of the best, but that doesn't mean much when the game was so easy to score points in. If you take all the greats from that era, and put them in the current game, all the goal, assist, and point scoring records will decrease significantly.  My point is that even though he was so much better, he isn't as good as some players now.  I believe that goal scoring wise, Ovechkin is better than Gretzky, and point scoring wise Crosby is better.  McDavid maybe, but he hasn't played long enough to judge.  There is a reason why the top goal scorer can barely get 50 goals in a season now days, and I believe Gretzky would probably max out at 40.

 

 

Gretzky was a magician.

 

He dominated in a way no modern era player is even close to.

 

Sorry.

 

104 points in the WHA at age 17/18 as a pro. 137 points as an NHL rookie. 164 points in a season before his 21st birthday. That's just getting started...

 

Dominated! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1000 career points before he turned 25.

 

6 year stretch averaging 200 points a year.

 

50 goals in 50 games.

 

Over 2800 career points.

 

Dominated!  I like Patrick Kane as much as the next guy? But lets be serious...

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

1000 career points before he turned 25.

 

6 year stretch averaging 200 points a year.

 

50 goals in 50 games.

 

Over 2800 career points.

 

Dominated!  I like Patrick Kane as much as the next guy? But lets be serious...

Even in 39 games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Gretzky was a magician.

 

He dominated in a way no modern era player is even close to.

 

Sorry.

 

104 points in the WHA at age 17/18 as a pro. 137 points as an NHL rookie. 164 points in a season before his 21st birthday. That's just getting started...

 

Dominated! 

Granted. Definitely the best of his time. My point is that style of play won't work in this current era. Point totals like that definitely wouldn't translate todays game. He didn't have an exceptional shot, or speed. Sorry, but he wouldn't be ahead of the pack in todays defensive game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2017 at 5:40 PM, Adarsh Sant said:

I still think there are players better than Gretzky, from this era.  We'll agree to disagree.

This is one of the greatest idiotic statements I have ever read on this site.

The reason any of these players are any good at all, is because they learned from Gretzky.

There is no one and no one will ever be as good at Gretzky on reading a play.  His vision was that much better than anyone elses.

 

Why do you think he has more assists than any player has points?  SO if you think he is inferior.....why is no one close to his numbers from his era?  How was he both the greatest scorer and the greatest set up man?

 

You are so unbelievably delusion it stuns me.

 

Oh and I could dig out a ton more stats for you if you still hang on to your far fetched ideology.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Adarsh Sant said:

Granted. Definitely the best of his time. My point is that style of play won't work in this current era. Point totals like that definitely wouldn't translate todays game. He didn't have an exceptional shot, or speed. Sorry, but he wouldn't be ahead of the pack in todays defensive game.

Wow you are a super troll.

The guy changed the way penalty killing was done.  The way 4 on 4 play was done.

 

If you don't think he had a great shot, look at the goal against Calgary.  Top shelf.  He was not the hardest shooter, but his accuracy was off the charts.

 

If you don't think he was great defensively, how did he steal so many pucks and get break aways?

 

 

I really think you need to go watch some tape and stop trolling the boards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, danjr said:

This is one of the greatest idiotic statements I have ever read on this site.

The reason any of these players are any good at all, is because they learned from Gretzky.

There is no one and no one will ever be as good at Gretzky on reading a play.  His vision was that much better than anyone elses.

 

Why do you think he has more assists than any player has points?  SO if you think he is inferior.....why is no one close to his numbers from his era?  How was he both the greatest scorer and the greatest set up man?

 

You are so unbelievably delusion it stuns me.

 

Oh and I could dig out a ton more stats for you if you still hang on to your far fetched ideology.

No one will ever touch his statistical records. That is mainly beause of the offensive style ofnthe game back then. And I do not think he is inferior to anyone FROM HIS ERA. However if he played in todays game, vision and passing is not enough to make you the best of all time. Why do we see only 1 player (or very rarely 2) get 50 goals, when back then multiple players achieved it regularly? It is not as if all the NHL forwards got worse and scoring. It is just much harder now.  He was the best of his time, but he wouldn't be the best in todays physical, grinding style of game. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gretzky/Lemeuix in today's NHL with todays training, medical advances etc. I still imagine they are better than anyone playing today. Game is faster now, tighter for sure. They are legends and sometimes that legend warps our views on them making them seem on a completely other planet but I believe in my heart of hearts they are well above todays talents.

 

Do they perform at the 150+ range? Definitely not but they'll still be legend status schooling even the best todays NHL has to offer.

 

Also Sedins are absolute legends to me. What they have done together is really special in a era where goals are tough to come by. Scoring consistently together on top of that? That's ridiculously amazing.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2017 at 2:45 AM, N7Nucks said:

Gretzky/Lemeuix in today's NHL with todays training, medical advances etc. I still imagine they are better than anyone playing today. Game is faster now, tighter for sure. They are legends and sometimes that legend warps our views on them making them seem on a completely other planet but I believe in my heart of hearts they are well above todays talents.

 

Do they perform at the 150+ range? Definitely not but they'll still be legend status schooling even the best todays NHL has to offer.

 

Also Sedins are absolute legends to me. What they have done together is really special in a era where goals are tough to come by. Scoring consistently together on top of that? That's ridiculously amazing.  

My sentiments exactly.  What I find especially amazing is what they've accomplished without the benefit of a true first liner.  I can only imagine what they would've done with one.  Burrows has probably been their best winger ... but would he have been a first liner elsewhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheapshots still happen today but guys like Bryan Marchment made a career out of throwing knee-on-knee hits back in the 'good old days'.

 

Bure had to put up with pukes like that.  Who knows how much longer his career could've lasted.

 

Karma though as I think Marchment retired as a result of a knee injury.  The Hockey Gods were smiling that day (not that I wish injury on anybody but 'you reap what you sow'...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, yes we can nucks said:

My sentiments exactly.  What I find especially amazing is what they've accomplished without the benefit of a true first liner.  I can only imagine what they would've done with one.  Burrows has probably been their best winger ... but would he have been a first liner elsewhere?

Imagine what Kurri and Gretzky would have done with one!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...