Quote:
Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner
So is it a matter of first hand knowledge, the seeing, that's critical in your view? Or is part of it just a matter of how close together different players might be in time?
I ask because I too saw Gretzky play as I was growing up, although Orr was just ahead of my time. It didn't stop me from reading up on past NHL and Stanley Cup exploits, and the Original Six, and the first expansion, and so on. I think I gained a lot of respect for past players though that, and of course a lot of broadcasters, journalists, and fans pass on their knowledge to new fans.
When Gretzky broke out, I remember people still maintaining that Orr or Howe were the greatest. So I guess things just go in cycles.
Sid's the real deal IMO though, and belongs in the conversation. I just hope he can stay healthy so there's not so many "What if"s when he's done like there is with Lemieux.
|
Yes its definitely a critical dimension in evaluating players... which is why scouts still go to see prospects in person. You can tell a lot by stats and stories but they don't tell everything.
Not disputing that Sid is a great player. He is. Just don't consider him Gretzky great. Just my opinion for what its worth... and on here, I will admit, most people don't consider it worth too much.