Why is Mario Lemieux not as great as the "Great One"?

Question

Minus his health, the points he accumulated in the short injury laden career he had, were on par if not exceeding Gretzky's. Is this bias simply because his body was not equipped for a long, healthy hockey carreer?

Answer 1

It all goes back to Mario entering the league. He didn't speak English very well and was shy about speaking. This was perceived as arrogance and him being "too good" to do interviews whereas Gretzky was always accomodating. Add the jealousy of most of the other cities media over not getting Mario in the draft and the accusations(somewhat true I think) that the Pens tanked the season before to get him.

As far as their images now, Gretzky will always be the "golden boy" who does no wrong. Ask any opponent or official who had the foulest mouth in the league and most will say Gretzky, yet he's seen as the ultimate role model. When Gretzky cried about the clutching and grabbing in the league, everyone listened and agreed, when Mario cried about the same exact thing, he was a whiner, a complainer and told "you're 6'4", shut up and learn to fight through it".

Even now, Mario has gone out of his way to save the Pens yet again and up until the arena announcement, fans/media in other cities said he was just a greedy S.O.B. looking to make some cash for himself.

I won't even get into the "who was better debate", but Clueless...Gretzky made better use of his linemates?????????? Let's see Gretzky make a 40 goal scorer out of Warren Young and Rob Brown, and let's see what Mario would have done with 2 Hall of Fame wings most of his career. Gretzky scored 215 points playing with Kurri, Anderson and Coffey...Mario scored 199 points playing with Rob Brown and Dan Quinn...compare those numbers now.

Answer 2

Injuries are a part of sport. If you can't play, that is a reflection on you, the athlete, not fate or happenstance. If, if, if. Everyone says 'if only...' this, that or the other thing.

Well, if the Rangers had a legitimate 2nd line center, Gretzky could have played longer. If Messier hadn't gone to Vancouver, Gretzky could have been more productive...and played longer. And my favorite, if the movie Air Force One had not done so well, the $15M signing bonus the Rangers offered Joe Sakic couldn't have been matched by the Avalanche (team owner produced the movie) and Gretzky could have played longer...

If you remove the 'ifs', you're left with tangibles that might be reasonably compared. So...

Do you want to compare cups? 4-2 Gretzky.
Points? Gretzky had more assists than anyone had points.
Points per game ratio? Gretzky maintained a 1.92 ratio in 1487 games, while Lemieux managed a 1.88 in 915.

In fact, the only reason a '66' could be imagined was because a '99' had set the precedent.

While Lemieux was a tremendous talent, the throne will never be his for whatever reason(s). That honor belongs to Gretzky until someone can make a legitimate claim to succession.

Answer 3

That is the argument that he was injured to often to be considered the greatest of all time. I think when the Hockey News rated the top 100 a few years ago (2 or 3 years) he was 3rd behind Gretzky and Orr( considered the greatest d-man of all time and revolutionizing the position). Gretzky gets the nod because he has the career point totals and holds the most records. 92 goals in a season is a record that will never get broken. Gretzky is also considered responsible for bringing Hockey to California after he arrived the Ducks , Sharks and Av's all moved out west. Lemieuxs points per game were better then Gretzky's and he did play a more physical game, but most people still consider Gretzky to be the greatest of all time. You have to remember also that Gretzky played several years and his greatest years in Canada , Edmonton and Hockey is the number one sport in Canada by a wide margin so most of the so called experts are a bit biased because they come from Canada. Lemieux was unreal being a Ranger season ticket holder since 1988 I got to see him play live a lot and he was the greatest player I ever saw.

Answer 4

I have brought this up many times on here. You're right about ALL the medical issues. He was the ONLY player to retire with 2 pts/game (until he came out of retirement to save our Pens!)

Also, Gretzky was loaded with hall of famers when he first came out and played on the Oilers.
Lemieux really didn't have any help till the '89/'90 season. Lemieux made everyone around him that much better.
Not taking anything away from #99, he is a beast.

Plus, people on here are all about points! If you would have switched Lemieux (no medical injuries as well) with Gretz, I know for a fact Mario would have had more than 3,000 pts.
But, I'm glad they didn't. I saw him play tons of times in person and he has saved this franchise for another 30 years!

CPR - He's not as skilled as Gretzky?!?! - You do not know hockey at all. Some people, I tell ya, they think they know everything, and in the end they don't know anything!

Answer 5

On pure stats, Gretzky was better. Yes Lemieux was injured for sometime, but on that basis you have to vote G.

Second, there was a quality about Gretzky that most pro atheletes don't have. He exuded a bit of the next door boy image. He never came off as arrogant or conceited about things. Never, at least to the degree many do, did we see his ego get in the way. In this sense, I'd compare Gretzky more to the likes of Bobby Orr than any other star to come out of hockey. Lemieux doesn't have the charisma that Gretzky nor Orr have to this day.

Answer 6

Can't argue with what you said, I'm just not seeing a lot of "bias", I've seen a LOT of people here who feel as you.

I'm STILL going with Gretzky.

I think the primary reasoning is you can't use injuries to say what somebody WOULD have accomplished. The logical outcome of this reasoning is that Lindros was the greatest player of all-time, or maybe someone who is in a wheelchair for life and never played hockey.

When it comes to skills it's like comparing apples and oranges. Gretzky had better anticipation, passing skills, and made better use of his teammates. Lemieux was a better stickhandler and pure scorer.

And debating the skills is somewhat pointless: I'm sure 99% of players who played with both of them would love to have been "cursed" with Lemieux's on-ice vision or Gretzky's "trouble" scoring goals.

Here's what does it for me: Lemieux, even in his best year never had 200 points and Gretzky did it FOUR TIMES. In fact it's interesting to note that the year when Lemieux had his highest total, GRETZKY with 30 fewer points, was chosen as MVP.

Lemieux was easily the SECOND BEST player in NHL history.

Answer 7

I think Lemieux is the best player who ever played the game... but I can certainly see why people give this title to Gretzky. You said it yourself, Mario just had bad luck.... he had a serious illness and his body was not as stable. Unfortunately (or furtunately), things in nature are not equal. That's just the way it is... I am just glad we had the little time we had with Mario. It's too bad that he couldn't surpass Gretzky's numbers and/or titles but oh well... Gretzsky deserves the recognition though. And Mario is up there, I think everyone knows what Mario could have been.

Answer 8

1. Health IS a factor. The ability for one's body to survive for 20 years is a noble ability. It is a sign of greatness in itself.

2. Lemieux's best season: 199 points. Gretzky's best FOUR seasons: 212, 205, 208, and 215 points.

3. Gretzky's career points-per-game: 1.92. Lemieux's: 1.88.

Lemieux was a GREAT player. At his best he was as good as Gretzky, if you factor in everything. But longevity DOES count, and Gretzky did just about everything Lemieux did AND was healthy. If nothing else, those FOUR years over 200 points are amazing in themselves. Lemieux, in his best season, couldn't do it. That says a lot.

Answer 9

Mario is not as great as Gretzky for 2 reasons.

1.) cancer
2.) chronic back problems

That is all. Gretzky was fortunate enough to have a relatively injury free career.

Answer 10

Lemieux was kind of jealous of gretzky during his early career.Although gretzky elevated lemieux to superstar status during the 1987 canada cup by teaching him how to hone his skills and take better care of himself off the ice,Lemieux refused to come to Gretzky's 1988 wedding over the fact he should of won MVP of the series instead of Gretzky.Lemieux was again furious over Gretzky taking the league MVP honors in 1989 when Lemieux had his best year ever.So getting back to the question,I say Lemieux was not as great as the "Great One" because of his pouty jealous attitude.