MJ vs. The Great One

[pipfan]

I am sure this has been done before, but who is greater-MJ or Gretsky? I got into this debate with a hockey fan friend. He argued WG was better in his sport due to his offensive dominance. I argued MJ was a two way all time great. For me, the deciding factor was that a top hockey player, no matter how great, only plays about half the game. It is not their fault-hockey is just too tiring-but MJ could play 45 minutes in a big game and dominate on both ends.

Thoughts? For team sports I have MJ #1, Ruth #2, Gretsky #3 Football is tough due to so many positions, and soccer has so many leagues.

[Quotatious]

As a fan of both sports (much bigger basketball fan, but I feel like I know enough about the NHL to answer this question), I think Gretzky was definitely more dominant in hockey than Jordan was in basketball (and I was a big MJ fan during the second 3-peat era). It's not a huge difference, but clear enough that I'm taking #99 with no hesitation. Before Lemieux's arrival, Gretzky's dominance over his peers was incredible, and his career totals are absolutely staggering. I mean, he has more career assists than any other player has total points...on the top of that, he's also the all-time leader in goals, and he has 9 of the top 11 scoring seasons in NHL history (and it's not like Gretzky's scoring records are a result of him playing forever, like for example Jason Kidd being 3rd all-time in 3-pointers made, despite being just a 34.9% career 3-point shooter - no, Gretzky is also the all-time leader in points per game).

He also has the championships (Jordan has 6, Gretzky 4, so Mike gets the edge here, but championships are obviously a team thing), MVPs (9 Hart Trophies for Gretzky, 5 MVPs for Jordan) and scoring titles (both have 10).

What's even more amazing is that Gretzky was hardly an elite "athlete" - Jordan was much more physically gifted, Gretzky was more like Bird, in terms of dominating the game because of his skills, intelligence and court/ice vision.

I'm not even a Gretzky fan as far as hockey (Penguins are my favorite franchise in the NHL), but his legacy is unbelievable. No one, not even Jordan or Kareem, can match that, in basketball.

[bondom34]

Great post Quo (though really, a Pens fan?). Gretzky is to me the GOAT athlete in any sport, he's the only guy I can legitimately say is head and shoulders above basically everyone else who's ever played their respective sport. I feel like Jordan may someday have a rival for the debate, but so far Gretzky's legacy has been around about the same amount of time, and noone is even in his league for the conversation.

[ardee]

Really? I feel like there are people who think Orr was comparable to Gretzky at least. Doctor MJ is one.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Quotatious]

Great post Quo (though really, a Pens fan?).

Yeah, for almost two decades now. Looking back at my beginnings as a sports fan - damn, I was lucky - Jordan was my first favorite NBA player (or Jordan/Pippen duo and the Bulls between 96 and 98), and Lemieux (or Lemieux/Jagr duo) in the NHL at the same time - these are top 3 duos ever in their respective sports.

Really? I feel like there are people who think Orr was comparable to Gretzky at least. Doctor MJ is one.

He was comparable in terms of talent, but he lacks longevity. Same with Lemieux. Howe would be the fourth GOAT candidate, he's a lot like Kareem, because of his longevity, and being the best/top 5/top 10 player for almost his entire career.

[Texas Chuck]

As absurd as Wayne's career numbers are they almost don't do justice to how he played the game. Do yourselves a favor and go back and watch some old games. His vision is absolutely otherworldly. He's seriously a better scorer than Mike and a better and more creative playmaker than Magic.


I've heard the Orr arguments, and no question he was a great defenseman. But if Russell can't get much traction above Mike, Orr has even less of a case against #99.

[bondom34]

Great post Quo (though really, a Pens fan?).

Yeah, for almost two decades now. Looking back at my beginnings as a sports fan - damn, I was lucky - Jordan was my first favorite NBA players (or Jordan/Pippen duo and the Bulls between 96 and 98), and Lemieux (or Lemieux/Jagr duo) in the NHL at the same time - these are top 3 duos ever in their respective sports.

Really? I feel like there are people who think Orr was comparable to Gretzky at least. Doctor MJ is one.

He was comparable in terms of talent, but he lacks longevity. Same with Lemieux. Howe would be the fourth GOAT candidate, he's a lot like Kareem, because of his longevity, and being the best/top 5/top 10 player for almost his entire career.

Nice, as a Flyers fan I'm required to harass you in some fashion . For Gretzky though, to add:
Career NHL Ranks:

Games played: 17th
Goals: 1st
Assists: 1st
Points: 1st
Goals Created: 1st
Plus/Minus: 4th
Even Strength Goals: 1st
PP Goals: 14th
Shorthanded Goals: 1st
Goals Per Game: 6th
Assists Per Game: 1st
Points Per Game: 1st
Goals Created Per Game: 3rd
Hat Tricks: 1st

[UN-Owen]

Great post Quo (though really, a Pens fan?). Gretzky is to me the GOAT athlete in any sport, he's the only guy I can legitimately say is head and shoulders above basically everyone else who's ever played their respective sport. I feel like Jordan may someday have a rival for the debate, but so far Gretzky's legacy has been around about the same amount of time, and noone is even in his league for the conversation.

Statistically, sure...

But many have Lemieux and Orr above Gretzky when it comes to on-ice dominance

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

What is the basketball equivalence of a hot goaltender? During a playoff series I will take a hot Goaltender over Gretzky.

As a hockey fan I pre-date Gretzky. I grew up on Bobby Orr and Phil Esposito. I am not ready to say that Gretzky is better than Orr. Ken Drydan defeated Orr and Esposito.

I wonder if Bill Russel was right when he said Boston did not properly appreciate his Celtics because they were racists. Baseball is too slow for TV. The NBA did a good thing when they stopped the players from taking forever to line up for free throws. Why did I pay more attention to Don Cherry's Bruins than the Cowens, Jo Jo White, Celtics?

One look at Gilbert Perreault and you can see the Greatness. With Gretzky you have to watch him more to see his greatness. The great skaters are easier to appreciate than the subtly skilled players.

At least in terms of his affect on the Bruins Larry Robinson was a better and more important player on the Montreal Canadians dynasty than Guy Lafleur was. But Guy Lafluer got the greater praise.

I did not see so much Gretzky because I was in the East and working but I did see his 2 finals against the Bruins. Gretzky was great but I think I am going with Jordan as being more impactful on the game.

Gretzky like any forward is off the ice for more than half of the game. It is hard for a hockey player to dominate the game while sitting on the bench.

[bondom34]

Great post Quo (though really, a Pens fan?). Gretzky is to me the GOAT athlete in any sport, he's the only guy I can legitimately say is head and shoulders above basically everyone else who's ever played their respective sport. I feel like Jordan may someday have a rival for the debate, but so far Gretzky's legacy has been around about the same amount of time, and noone is even in his league for the conversation.

Statistically, sure...

But many have Lemieux and Orr above Gretzky when it comes to on-ice dominance

You can make a debate for peak I suppose, but when talking GOAT to me, longevity has to factor in.

Edit: And for perspective, Lemieux is the career leader in goals created per game at .710. Gretzky is 3rd at .685.
Gretzky played over 550 more games than Lemieux for his career!

[JeepCSC]

Can someone place Gretzky in context? Growing up you obviously heard about him, but hockey was not a sport watched here let alone understood prior to the Hurricanes. Was there anything happening to explain why Gretzky dominated a sport statistically to such a degree? Did hockey's Kareems, Russells, and Wilts simply not exist or were hampered by injuries? Or were they there and Gretzky simply made them look much less?

[bondom34]

Can someone place Gretzky in context? Growing up you obviously heard about him, but hockey was not a sport watched here let alone understood prior to the Hurricanes. Was there anything happening to explain why Gretzky dominated a sport statistically to such a degree? Did hockey's Kareems, Russells, and Wilts simply not exist or were hampered by injuries? Or were they there and Gretzky simply made them look much less?

I'd be intrigued by this too, as I'm no historian. I really started to like hockey in the mid/late 90s, so Gretzky and Lemieux were winding down but I am somewhat familiar with them. Really I'm most familiar w/ the Flyers/Lindros.

[The Realist]

Both played in dominant teams in their heyday but the level of basketball then was far closer to this day in terms of the possibility to put up stats than in ice hockey.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

I've heard the Orr arguments, and no question he was a great defenseman. But if Russell can't get much traction above Mike, Orr has even less of a case against #99.

The increase in talent level and athleticism in the NHL from 1968 to 1984 was much smaller than the increase in talent level and athleticism in the NBA from 1968 to 1984.

Most of Russel's career was before 1968. Most of Orr's career was after 1967.
The NHL talent pool was diluted by expansion during Orr's career. The Maurice Richard and Gordie Howe supporters can argue that those pre expansion players should be considered with ORR, Gretzky and Lemieux.

If I ignore the stats and other people's opinion and rate Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux by what I saw then I am rating Orr and Lemieux above Gretzky. But I concede that Gretzky's mind and vision is his great talent and I needed to watch more Gretzky just as people need to watch more Bird, and Nash to realize how good they are.

[ushvinder88]

The problem with this comparison is that Americans dont send their best athletes to go play ice hockey. They send their best athletes to play football, baseball and basketball. I dont think gretzky would have the same domination if minorities played the sport and if white americans grew up wanting to be an ice hockey player rather than a pitcher or quarterback. Context needs to be factored in.

In my opinion donald bradman is more dominant than gretzky because he dominated cricket and he played against blacks and indians. Ice hockey is essentially a racially segregated sport.

[Doctor MJ]

Really? I feel like there are people who think Orr was comparable to Gretzky at least. Doctor MJ is one.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Right, I'm no hockey expert, but there are some interesting studies out there looking at hockey +/-, which is where the stat started.

If we go by the raw stuff, which is of course very flawed, Bobby Orr led the league 6 times, while Gretzky only led it 4.

Here's an analysis trying to do a crude adjusted plus/minus:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showt ... p?t=591548

Key takeaways:

1. Ray Bourque leads all in the study when it comes to career numbers, Orr is 2nd, Gretzky is 4th
2. Orr has the lead by far when we actually look at the rate at which people accumulated these numbers. He rates a +72 per season, while Bourque and Gretzky are both in the 20s.

What the data seems to say to me is that Gretzky in his true prime, was probably the 2nd best player we've ever seen behind Orr, but that his extended career was FAR less impactful than a guy like Bourque. He continued to be "the man" on his team, but his actual value above replacement wasn't all that huge.

It's also intersting to remember or understand with +/- data: It's long been seen as "the defencemen's statistic", not because there's a reason why such player's should do better in it, but because it's a place they can look good in a sport where they don't get stats for doing their job. From what I can tell people saw it as a great way to look at defencemen...but they still took it with a huge grain of salt when looking at MVP contenders where they preferred the guys racking up more traditional stats.

This means to me that there's really nothing weird about saying Orr, at least at his best, was better than Gretzky. Orr being the best at what he did is an absolute given, and he did something totally different than Gretzky. It should have been seen as within the realm of possibility that he was better than Gretzky all along.

So yeah to the question: I'm inclined to side with Jordan above Gretzky with all this in mind.

[Doctor MJ]

Can someone place Gretzky in context? Growing up you obviously heard about him, but hockey was not a sport watched here let alone understood prior to the Hurricanes. Was there anything happening to explain why Gretzky dominated a sport statistically to such a degree? Did hockey's Kareems, Russells, and Wilts simply not exist or were hampered by injuries? Or were they there and Gretzky simply made them look much less?

Greatzky was one of those candidates for "ultimate prodigy".

https://espn.go.com/sportscentury/featu ... 14218.html

"The headline says, 'Hull, Richard, Howe and Gretzky,'" he recalled. "That was lots of pressure."

...

Has there ever been a more prophetic headline? Has any 9-year-old ever lived up to such expectations? Has any 9-year-old ever faced such expectations?

At 6, he was skating with ten-year-old's. When he reached double figures in age, he was scoring in three figures, notching an incredible 378 goals in an 82-game season. That was a year or so after that headline hit the newsstands. An entire nation of Canadians turned its lonely eyes to this prodigy.

It has been said that Gretzky anticipated better than anyone who ever played the game. He also visualized what should happen, where the other 11 players on the ice would be in the next few seconds.

"(Sportswriters) call it peripheral vision," Gretzky said in a Playboy interview. "I call it fear. Growing up, I was always the small guy. When I was 5 and playing against 11-year-olds, who were bigger, stronger, faster, I just had to figure out a way to play with them. When I was 14, I played against 20-year-olds, and when I was 17, I played with men.

"Basically, I had to play the same style all the way through. I couldn't beat people with my strength; I don't have a hard shot; I'm not the quickest skater in the league. My eyes and my mind have to do most of the work."

So yeah, this isn't one of things where the kid came out of nowhere. People saw the talent coming a mile away like with a LeBron James...except that Gretzky hit the NHL way harder, earning his first MVP at age 19.

I tend to see Gretzky nowadays through the lens of Steve Nash. Go ahead and call me a homer, but I'm not saying they are equal.

The thing about Nash is that growing up he was a star in a wide variety of team sports, from basketball, to soccer, to hockey, to lacrosse, to rugby basically as soon as he picked the sport up because every time, he could just see the field in ways no one else around him could. And as we've now seen, even in a sport where physical talent is completely overwhelming like NBA basketball, this still let him become an MVP.

So Gretzky has that. Does he have it more than Nash. I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. It''s clear cut that Nash could never have been as good as Gretzky at hockey - despite Gretzky's lithe frame, he was clearly a great physical talent renown for incredible ability to start & stop on skates. There's absolutely no reason to think Nash would have had anything like that. Whether Gretzky had a mental edge above what I see as the smartest basketball player of the current generation, I don't know.

[Exodus]

Gretzky is a combo of Nash/Magic as a play maker and Jordan as a scorer. He was the better option offensively. Jordan was the better defender.

case closed /

[lobosloboslobos]

Can someone place Gretzky in context? Growing up you obviously heard about him, but hockey was not a sport watched here let alone understood prior to the Hurricanes. Was there anything happening to explain why Gretzky dominated a sport statistically to such a degree? Did hockey's Kareems, Russells, and Wilts simply not exist or were hampered by injuries? Or were they there and Gretzky simply made them look much less?

Some context:

When he retired Gretzky had 61 NHL scoring records including pretty much every one that ever mattered.

He beat many of the all-time highest-importance records by 25% or more and some years his offensive totals were a full 40% higher than the next player. It would be like someone playing baseball and hitting .500 for a season or having a 75 game hitting streak. In football it would be like rushing for 3,000 yards or throwing for 7,500 yards.In basketball it's hard because numbers are skewed across eras, but it would maybe be like him averaging 45 pts and 25 assist over a season in our current game. I mean the numbers were just staggering. He has 9 of the best 11 offensive seasons in NHL history. Only one player (Maurice Richard) had every scored 50 goals in 50 games and that was 30 years before Gretzky scored 5 in a game to total 50 goals in 39 games! In his 3rd year he scored 212 points. Only 2 guys in history had ever even scored 130 before!

As others have said, numbers are one thing though, and watching him was another. Unfortunately, because CBC TV only discovered close ups and low camera angles last week, most of the footage from his career is weak. I don't know why but when I search on YouTube I never find compilations that capture his magic. It sucks but its' true.

Here's some more context. When he was traded from the Oilers, with whom he had won 4 Stanley Cups in 5 years (should have been 5 but they lost on a fluke) he was traded to one of the worst teams in the league and a total write off franchise, the Los Angeles Kings. The very next year he led the Kings to the playoffs and who did they meet in the first round? His old team, the reigning champs loaded with hall of famers. Guess what? the Kings beat them with Gretzky dominating. The next year the Kings made the playoffs again (of course both years Gretzky won the scoring titles) and this time they met the Calgary Flames, the new defending champs, in the first round, and they beat them. They made it to the finals that year but he never did win another cup.

Mario was incredible. Orr was truly an unbelievable athlete and all-round player who did things nobody has done since. They are surely top 3 of all time. But as great as those guys were neither was equal to Gretzky. He did things that nobody dreamed were possible and he did them again and again and again.

Michael Jordan was the GOAT ball player but he never came close to dominating his sport like Gretzky did.

[Rupert Murdoch]

Donald Bradman >>> Jordan and Gretzky