What made Gretzky so great?
craig44
Posts: 11,254 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
the Orr discussion got me to thinking about this. now, I am not a hockey guy, and know very little about the nuance of the game. What skills made Gretzky ¨the Great one?¨ he wasnt that big, so I am guessing it wasnt size/strength. was he blazingly fast? was he the product of a goal scoring system? was it the way the game was played then? If it was a higher scoring era, what set Gretzky apart in that era?
follow up question. it seems that after the age of 30 or so, he lost the ability to be a big time goal scorer. what happened? was there an injury? It doesnt seem he would have gone off the cliff at that young age as his assist numbers stayed high.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
0
Comments
Pretty sure it was his ability to eat an entire large pizza in one sitting.
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
He had great hands that he passed on to his daughter.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2018/09/20/USAT/cd452195-aeaa-4e36-a79f-45ba79ecfbe4-AP_Tournament_of_Champions_Golf.JPG?width=534&height=712&fit=bounds&auto=webp[
Must have this pic inline
And keep it down.
It's the hash symbol, it triggers jumbo text here.
Gretzky was probably the smartest player ever. He was there to pass and shoot. The issue I always had was that players were not able to touch him. There was an unwritten rule that no one was allowed to check him or hurt him. Good luck finding video of anything physical about his game. He was surrounded by HOF'ers in Edmonton and had more support than any of the other mentioned stars. He was great for the sport but the numbers are just inflated like it was the baseball PED era. Teemu had 76 goals as a rookie. Enough said. If he played in Orr's brutal era he would be injured more than anyone. The video where they went after Orr's knees would have possibly ended Gretzky's career. He was just a small man and that would have destroyed his career in that era. I just think that people put too much emphasis on his all time numbers (very impressive) that would have been a fraction in another era. It's all about the physical game, and he had none while all these other players were doing more. If people want to say he had the best career ever then I'm fine with that, but to say he was the best player is just ridiculous.
So am I understanding correctly that he was a product of a good system? It sounds like he was the larry bird of hockey. Not great physical skills, but great court/ice vision.
Is lemieux considered a greater more dominant player?
My other question from the original post was why such a drastic drop off in goal scoring at age 30? What happened?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
By the way, thanks for all the responses so far. I find this fascinating
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I agree with what is said above.
Would like to add that he was an extremely accurate passer and shooter.
His passes wouldn't make the other player slow down or speed up, so when they got the puck they were in a good shooting position. He also had some great scorers to pass to.
His shot was also super accurate. Time after time I see players "beat" the goalie only to shoot the puck right into the goalie's body or fail to raise the puck and it goes right into a pad. When Gretzky had an opening he hit it.
Of course he was on a great team during a time when scoring was encouraged, but he was able to put up points like no other.
Too bad Lemieux had injury problems, he could have given Wayne a run for his money!
He went to the Kings, end of story. No support system. No one to pass to and very few scored when you passed to them. The Oilers were a HOF team.
Yes, Lemieux was more dominant. Would you want to see a Lemieux coming at you full speed. Hell no. Even Orr said Lemieux was the most gifted player ever. He could hurt you if you were getting physical with him but Gretzky just avoided all that. Remember, Gretzky was a very small player and played the game and adapted to his ability. He was a VERY smart player. He did have a lot of skill and used it greatly, but it's like seeing a boxer never fight the best in their prime and being called the greatest. I just think Gretzky was just never "tested" as a player. He was never "hit".The physical aspect of the game takes it's toll on everyone, but it's just something he never had to deal with. Watch the videos I provided of Orr and watch the videos of Gretzky on Youtube and you will see the difference in the physical game.
P.S. Wayne was still awesome
OK...where to start:
1) Gretzky led the league in scoring multiple times with the Kings. And won an MVP another year there.
2) Yes, he had a ton of help in Edmonton. But he was the one putting up 200 points, not the other guys for Edmonton who had the same teammates.
3) Gretzky wouldn't have been as good in another era? What about Orr? Orr was wildly successful because his skating stood out. It wouldn't today. You think he's putting up 100 points today? Try 70. Maybe.
4) What made Gretzky so successful? Because he was a good enough skater. Had a good enough shot that was INCREDIBLY accurate. His passing was the best that's ever been seen. And he had a higher hockey IQ and vision than anybody ever. By a LOT.
5) And the idea that Gretzky was never hit is just not true. There's plenty of videos out there of him getting hit. No one was running stars through the boards back then - it wasn't just Gretzky.
Just for the record, though, if I'm picking one guy, I'm taking Mario Lemieux. He could do everything Gretzky could do - and was 6'4", 215lbs. And put up gigantic numbers while dealing with cancer and crippling back injuries. Sat out three full seasons then came back and scored nearly a goal a game in a half season (35 in 43 games).
Read the record books.
1970’s and others have hit on it. He always knew where the puck was supposed to go and where in would be. Combine that with eyes in the back of his head, tough on his skates, great teammates and then it’s easy to see why he has all the records.
Basically if you or I were on the ice with Gretzky and you put your stick on the ice in the offensive zone there’s a chance you would score a goal.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
The same thing that will get you into the NBA...
D's: 54S,53P,50P,49S,45D+S,44S,43D,41S,40D+S,39D+S,38D+S,37D+S,36S,35D+S,all 16-34's
Q's: 52S,47S,46S,40S,39S,38S,37D+S,36D+S,35D,34D,32D+S
74T: 37,38,47,151,193,241,435,570,610,654,655 97 Finest silver: 115,135,139,145,310
73T:31,55,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,80,152,165,189,213,235,237,257,341,344,377,379,390,422,433,453,480,497,545,554,563,580,606,613,630
95 Ultra GM Sets: Golden Prospects,HR Kings,On-Base Leaders,Power Plus,RBI Kings,Rising Stars
These are some great answers guys. While I dont know much about the sport, I can appreciate the athletic ability of the players. The Orr thread was interesting as I knew he was great and then was injured. I was always somewhat underwhelmed by his statistics compared to gretzky/lemieux etc. but it seems the 1980´s was a high scoring era unlike the time when Orr played.
The Gretzky dropoff after 30 is still a mystery to me though. you would think he would still be in his prime at 30
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Look at his shooting percentage after 1990-91.
He also had some injuries it would appear. Obviously he was at his peak with Edmonton, playing with some all-time greats in a "scoring" era.
Was still a great assist guy right until the end!
I think this is it;
"Gretzky, even at 31 and with 14 pro seasons—all of them his best—behind him, is back on the ice.
About Wayne's back: The actual ailment is a herniated thoracic disk that radiates pain to his chest. The injury is most likely the result of his getting hit from behind for 14 seasons, a violence that has seemed to escalate against Gretzky in recent years.
Doctors knew of no other athlete who had recovered from a herniated thoracic disk to play again. "We have no timetable for this program and will not speculate on a date for his return," said Dr. Robert Watkins, an orthopedic consultant.
Doctors knew of no other athlete who had recovered from a herniated thoracic disk to play again. "We have no timetable for this program and will not speculate on a date for his return," said Dr. Robert Watkins, an orthopedic consultant."
As a goal scorer only, maybe. Gretzky was a superior assist producer.
Don't forget, Wayne averaged about a goal per game for 4 straight years!
It really is too bad Mario had health issues, he was an AMAZING player. I remember him simply taking over games against my North Stars in the finals.
Was CLEARLY the best player on the ice.
thanks joe! great info. it seems wayne had a very serious injury and was still able to play another 6 or 7 years. this would explain his lesser production.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Gretzky was the Jordan of Hockey!
Part of Gretzky producing more assists is that he simply had better teammates for much of his career. And he played in a slightly different era. Mario put up monster numbers even in the post-95 clutch & grab era. He was just super-dominant. I think his size makes him a success in any era.
Let's not get crazy here. Bobby Orr had himself a pretty good teammate or two. Like Phil Esposito, who only led the league in scoring 5 times in 6 years, goals for 6 straight years, and set the single season scoring records. And just happened to leave in 1976 as well.
Orr only had a couple of "prime" years because he retired so young. Orr in his "half career" had a higher +/- than Gretzky had in a full career. The second half of Wayne's career was pretty much a minus almost every single year. When Orr was on the ice, your team scored and you were not scored on. Hell, in 1969 Orr won every award that there was. The only player in the sports existence to do so. Scary to think what would have happened if the knees never gave out, just like Mantle in baseball.
Gretzky's drop off after 30 is not that mysterious. It's a brutal sport that takes a lot out of you. He played smart and had a long career where Orr played very physical and destroyed his body.
Yeah, 42 goals at 36 years old. He was awful.
Orr was obviously better than Espo. All I'm saying is Boston wasn't a one-man show.
So it seems Orr is hockeys version of Jordan. The greatest two way threat ever. is the only reason he is ranked below Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe etc because of their higher scoring? or is it because Orr had a small sample size?
had Orr played offense only, could he have been a goal scorer, facilitator to the level of a gretzky/Lemieux?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
this is great info. maybe I will become a hockey fan, or at least a historian of the sport
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
My first hockey game was in Detroit in 1967. I was so young I sat on my dads lap. I was already playing youth hockey at 4 and I remember thinking my Dad was taking me to heaven. It was Boston vs The Red Wings. As soon as I saw Orr skate my Dad said that’s all I could talk about for weeks . I wanted to be Bobby Orr.
Plus Bobby Orr had great hockey hair. He had a helmet made of hair.
FYI this takes zero away from Gretzky or Howe. I wouldn’t argue much for anyone who had either as GOAT.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Glicker?
Orr is usually ranked #2 behind Gretzky on most lists. Having a short career is probably why. All of the players you mentioned had statistically better careers, but I just can't put anyone ahead of Orr as a better "player".
You asked if Orr would have had Gretzky and Lemieux numbers offensively if he just played offense, I just don't see his numbers being much higher in the era he played in. Scoring 50 goals in Orr's era was a major accomplishment, but in the 80's and 90's it was an average season.
There are many great characters in Hockey history. Enjoy the stories, maybe start with Eddie Shore.
First part is true. Second part is not. For example, in 1983/84 when Gretzky scored 87 goals, a total of 8 guys scored 50. And 2nd in the league was 56. So Gretzky had 55% more goals than the second-best total. 50 goals was more common but it was not, and never has been, "an average season" by any means.
Jordan didn't win anything by himself either. He needed a lot of help, too. Like Scottie Pippen.
What you're saying is simply not true. The team got worse his first year. Yes, he was an 18-year old rookie but "right away" is right away. His 2nd year, Boston improved by 40 points. Perhaps not coincidentally, Phil Esposito joined Boston that same year. Did Orr make Espo better? Of course. That's what great players do. But there's also absolutely no question that Espo made Orr a better player as well. That's what great players do.
Hard to make a case for Orr as a one-man show when he multiple HOFers for teammates.
Again, to be clear, Orr is definitely a top 3 or 4 guy for me, if not #2. Mario is my guy at #1.
You don't seem to get it.
Even ONE Orr on the ice ALONE would have beaten most teams, and that's without a goalie too!
I put Gretzky and Howe at 1 and 1a.
Lemieux and Orr 2 and 2a because of shorter careers.
Pure talent; Orr, Lemieux, Gretzky, Howe really too close to call.
Don’t hold the fact that we are both from Detroit against me! ( and we are both Mark’s)
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
there are no one man shows in team sports.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I read once that Orr didn't do push ups, he pushed the earth down.
Yes, you are correct.