Sidney Crosby Appreciation Thread

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by icecube

Lemieux was pretty close.

Yes he was... I have amended my original rant.

[vilzeh]

The athleticism this generation is so much better than it was back in the days, that's why you can't have HUGE gaps on players anymore, they are all professional athletes, nothing away from Gretzky though, but its like that in every sport these days.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Rerun

How old are you Strombad and all your other pro Crosby supporters that say that Crosby is the new Gretzky?

I ask because if you were not able to watch Gretzky play in his prime (1978-1994... 16 years by the way.... How many players can be considered in their prime for 16 years?).... and I'm not talking you-tube videos or watching when you were 5 or 10 years old....

...Frankly, you don't have a fricking clue!

There is a reason why Gretzky holds 9,999 records and awards. He was just that good. Nobody else, other than Mario Lemieux for a few years, was even close.

end rant/

http://giphy.com/gifs/rX1syRcrTcsTe

[JobHopper]

Love the Sidney Crosby.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

The athleticism this generation is so much better than it was back in the days, that's why you can't have HUGE gaps on players anymore, they are all professional athletes, nothing away from Gretzky though, but its like that in every sport these days.

I agree with your point 100%, but one thing I have to say about Gretzky is that physically, he was nothing great. Fitness certainly gave him no edge. In fact, he was probably a below average skater even in the 1980s when half the players still smoked.... not to mention skinny. I remember watching him and seeing typically benign plays turn into scoring chances and wondering what the heck I missed leading up to it.

He was probably the smartest player anyone has seen. His ability to read plays and know exactly what other players were thinking was his edge. I am not sure how someone even develops that ability - you either have it or you don't.

It's hard to say for sure if Gretzky could have been as productive today as back then, but the things that made him better are still very much applicable today.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

The athleticism this generation is so much better than it was back in the days, that's why you can't have HUGE gaps on players anymore, they are all professional athletes, nothing away from Gretzky though, but its like that in every sport these days.

If Gretzky played in today's NHL, with the current conditioning and physical training that today's athletes have, he's still be head and shoulders above the rest of the pack.... Crosby included.

The guy saw the ice like nobody before or since. You'd swear he had 360 degree radar. He knew where everyone was, all the time, and the guy could float a pass, through sticks an skates, like it was on a cloud. The worst klutz in the NHL, if he was playing on Gretzky's line, could score 20 goals.

Also, because of his on-ice awareness, he was almost impossible to hit. Sure, once in a while someone would get a piece of him, but rarely did anyone get all of him.

Even at 38 years old (after playing for 20 years) he was still a better player than 99% of all the other pros.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by strombad

http://giphy.com/gifs/rX1syRcrTcsTe

So.. you didn't answer my question. Just how old are you?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Because it's so difficult to compare eras

Crosby is to his peers, roughly just as ahead as Lemieux was to his, although I
agree that could be a little too generous.

Is it? We're talking about 1996, that was less than 20 years ago.

Here's how I see it. Lemieux post-prime>>>>>In his prime Sakic. Crosby pre-prime>In his twilight Sakic. Pick any of the many players that overlapped both careers and it's the same story. Sure Lemieux and Crosby didn't play their primes at the same time (arguable if Crosby has even reached his) but it's not like we don't have a ton of benchmarks to compare the two with.

Sakic was getting 100 points as a 37 year old when Crosby was hitting his so far peak 120. Has the game changed that much in 5 years? I don't think so. Has Crosby separated himself from the pack to anywhere near the degree Lemieux has? If so you would think he would have more than 1 Hart (even with how stupid the voters are because there would be no other choice). He doesn't, in fact Ovechkin with his 3 Harts, 3 Lester B. Pearsons, 3 Rocket Richards, and an Art Ross has filled up his individual trophy case quite a bit more than Crosby. Concussions hurt, and it sucks for Crosby and us, but he's far from the first player to have his career derailed due to injuries.

Originally Posted by vilzeh

The athleticism this generation is so much better than it was back in the days, that's why you can't have HUGE gaps on players anymore, they are all professional athletes, nothing away from Gretzky though, but its like that in every sport these days.

Okay fine, if you want to say that about Gretzky and 1980. What about Lemieux and 1996? Take a look at those rosters, the players weren't significant worst, that excuse simply doesn't work.

You have a 27 year old Lidstrom playing, he seemed to be able to keep up in today's NHL half decently. Sakic, Yzerman, Selanne, etc. etc. etc. If the game changed half as much as people believe it has from 1996 to now there's no way Selanne would be able to play in it at his age. There's no way that Sakic would be a star after the lockout. There's no way Lidstrom would have won 7 Norris trophies since 2001. They are and they did.

[transplant99]

I see a trend in these threads every time they pop up.

Younger people tend to think that because what they are seeing now, that this guy has to be as good or beter than that guy was "back then". And to some degree the older folks may memorialize those they watched when younger to a level that they might not be. Truth in both statements in my mind.

But,

In this case there is no way to overstate how great Wayne Gretzky was...and this coming from an avowed hater of ALL things Oiler. Regardless of any bias in who I cheer for...Wayne Gretzky is, was, and likely will always be the single best hockey player the game ever sees. This comes after some reflection through the years where i would have stated emphatically otherwise in favor of Bobby Orr or Mario and going back even further, Gordie Howe.

Truth is though that Wayne was on a level no one has ever been before or since. His athletic ability is being torn down here, which i find laughable, because he truly was one of the best athletes in ANY sport in his prime. What he was able to do with a puck in full flight or along the boards or behind the net or standing still etc....has never ever been matched, and when his hockey IQ was sprinkled in along with a plethora of really good teammates, the guy was quite simply...unstoppable. Who else that ever played the game is in that same category? Again Lemieux and Orr for spurts, and Howe but in a different way.

When you have a player that had 20+ more assists than Mario (who was 2nd in the league) had points in one season...only then can you begin to fathom how dominant he was. Add onto that he potted 50+ goals as well that year.

If you never saw WG live, its literally impossible to understand how insanely great he was. Thats not a knock on Crosby or any other great player the league has had, it just demonstrates how completely and totally dominant he was. I am very blessed to have watched his career from beginning to end along with all the other guys of his era and some before.

he is, was and probaly will be...the best ever.

[vilzeh]

I agree with all of the above. I know Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, it's true, but my point mainly here is that I don't think he could have gathered those crazy points in today´s NHL even if he was in his prime now. Because the sport has evolved more, the goaltenders have become so much better, I have no doubt he wouldn't be the best now, but the point totals are so misleading because of the era he played in, with the goaltending quality, or lack of quality, that's why, and I will say it: No one will EVER break his crazy point records.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I see a trend in these threads every time they pop up.

Younger people tend to think that because what they are seeing now, that this guy has to be as good or beter than that guy was "back then". .....

.....he (WG) is, was and probaly will be...the best ever.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

I agree with all of the above. I know Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, it's true, but my point mainly here is that I don't think he could have gathered those crazy points in today´s NHL even if he was in his prime now. Because the sport has evolved more, the goaltenders have become so much better, I have no doubt he wouldn't be the best now, but the point totals are so misleading because of the era he played in, with the goaltending quality, or lack of quality, that's why, and I will say it: No one will EVER break his crazy point records.

But that's ignoring that his contemporary Lemieux was able to put up 161 points in 70 games, a staggering 190 point pace, against Roy, Hasek and Brodeur in 1996. Those guys aren't MacDonald and Dubnyk but they were half decent.

I don't doubt his totals would take a hit, but I feel like it's often very overstated simply because people are so ready to parrot the "high scoring 80s" while ignoring other arguments.

Oh well, I've become a broken record at this point but no one seems to address Lemieux' 1996 season when they bring up the terrible goalies, terrible competition argument.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

I agree with all of the above. I know Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, it's true, but my point mainly here is that I don't think he could have gathered those crazy points in today´s NHL even if he was in his prime now. Because the sport has evolved more, the goaltenders have become so much better, I have no doubt he wouldn't be the best now, but the point totals are so misleading because of the era he played in, with the goaltending quality, or lack of quality, that's why, and I will say it: No one will EVER break his crazy point records.

But in the same respect we could say Wayne with todays sticks, skates and lighter equipment mixed with the better supplements and training equipment would be that much better.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

I agree with all of the above. I know Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, it's true, but my point mainly here is that I don't think he could have gathered those crazy points in today´s NHL even if he was in his prime now. Because the sport has evolved more, the goaltenders have become so much better, I have no doubt he wouldn't be the best now, but the point totals are so misleading because of the era he played in, with the goaltending quality, or lack of quality, that's why, and I will say it: No one will EVER break his crazy point records.

Forget the point totals...its irrelevant in this discussion, and why i dont mention nary a one of them.

Regardless of rules, goaltending, etc ....what Gretzky did transcended the sport and quite literally changed the way the game was played. Thats how dominant he was. No one before or since can make that sort of claim, and again, only illustrates how no one is or ever has been on his level when enveloping the entire career.

Now i gotta go rinse my mouth out.

[Tinordi]

The only way to evaluate players between eras is to evaluate them relative to their peers.

I'm pretty sure Gretzky was a giant compared to his peers while Crosby is merely the best.

But that's fine. Why can't this thread be about appreciating Crosby? I love his game. I love his drive and determination. I love that he's the best player in the league not necessarily because of his skill set but because of his effort and love for the game.

Either way. Continue with the endless feedback loop of Crosby vs Gretsky vs Lemieux. The thing about generational players is that they're ALL unique and difficult to compare to each other. They all dominate the game in different ways and are products of the eras in which they play.

Crosby is the epitome of this era's generational player. Incredibly fast, strong, determined and makes plays at speed.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Forget the point totals...its irrelevant in this discussion, and why i dont mention nary a one of them.

Regardless of rules, goaltending, etc ....what Gretzky did transcended the sport and quite literally changed the way the game was played. Thats how dominant he was. No one before or since can make that sort of claim, and again, only illustrates how no one is or ever has been on his level when enveloping the entire career.

Now i gotta go rinse my mouth out.

Orr can.

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

But that's ignoring that his contemporary Lemieux was able to put up 161 points in 70 games, a staggering 190 point pace, against Roy, Hasek and Brodeur in 1996. Those guys aren't MacDonald and Dubnyk but they were half decent.

Oh well, I've become a broken record at this point but no one seems to address Lemieux' 1996 season when they bring up the terrible goalies, terrible competition argument.

Those are great names, yeah, but the entire game has also evolved so much, you can't go coast to coast anymore, very rarely and score a goal, or blast a slapshot from the blueline with no screen whatsoever to score a goal (Gretzky did that a lot, his shot was out of this world, but still goaltenders today would pick those like cherries)

Why I'm leaning towards Crosby (I'm pretty young too, yes!) is because he's more of a 'complete' package, both ways. Everyone knows Kurri was the defense responsible player in Gretzky´s line who did all the defensive work so Gretzky could do his magic to the other end.

[RyZ]

Anybody making a straight numbers comparison without taking difference in era into account is crazy.

Even Gretzky wouldnt get even close to 200 points in a year in todays NHL.

Sid would be maybe a little below Lemieux and Gretzky but above the Yzerman/Sakic crowd. He has the 4th best PPG ever and plays in the modern, far lower scoring era than the 3 guys in front of him (Gretzky, Lemieux, Bossy).

If Sid played in the free wheeling 80's he would have put up rediculous numbers.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by vilzeh

Those are great names, yeah, but the entire game has also evolved so much, you can't go coast to coast anymore, very rarely and score a goal, or blast a slapshot from the blueline with no screen whatsoever to score a goal (Gretzky did that a lot, his shot was out of this world, but still goaltenders today would pick those like cherries)

1996 was in the dead puck era though...Brodeur, the trap, left wing lock, clutching and grabbing. Not buying the excuse it was easier to score goals compared to today.

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

1996 was in the dead puck era though...Brodeur, the trap, left wing lock, clutching and grabbing. Not buying the excuse it was easier to score goals compared to today.

I totally believe it was easier to score goals back then, just simply because the games these days are defensive minded and the goaltenders have bigger pads.