he scored 69 goals in only 60. thats insane!!. I just found that out today. he missed 24 games and finished the season with 160 pts. what do you think about that?(better than gretzky? yes)(medicore supporting cast? yes)
2007-10-10 08:22:14 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Hockey
Mario Lemieux was on pace for 96 goals, 127 assists and 223 points in the 1992-93 season. If he would have stayed healthy all year, we'd be looking at a third consecutive Cup for the Penguins. And consider this, in the last 20 or so games, he had scored over 30 goals and 60 points, all after recovering from radiation treatment from Hodgkins' disease. No one will ever do that again.
As for your comments, I agree that he was better than Gretzky at that point in his career. I disagree, however, with your comment about a mediocre supporting cast. Look at some of these other players from that team that year:
Jaromir Jagr
Ron Francis
Kevin Stevens
Rick Tocchet
Larry Murphy
Tom Barrasso
In my opinion, that's a pretty fine assortment of players to have on your team at any time.
2007-10-10 10:36:47 · answer #1 · answered by Teej 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How is it better than Gretzky?
69 goals in 60 games, that would be 92 goals in a season.
Wait!...That is the number that Gretzky scored in his best season.
160 points in 60 games? Again, multiply it out and you get LESS than Gretzky's record season (213 vs 215) and only one more than Gretzky's second best season. (And Lemieux never approached these gpg anf ppg numbers again)
Mediocre supporting cast?
I don't think so. Ron Francis, Jaromir Jagr, Kevin Stevens are your Kurri, Messier, and Anderson. In fact, Stevens best season was better than Anderson and Messier's best season. Ron Francis was a superstar by that time. So, in theory, this was just as good a supporting cast as Gretzky ever had. Kevin Stevens had better seasons than Messier AND Anderson, personal issues prevented him from having more of them.
So, another point is that the 1992-93 scoring season is among the highest in NHL history.
2007-10-10 15:39:37 · answer #2 · answered by cyrenaica 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why do you numbskulls even answer questions like this.
Until someone comes along who everyone on the planet says is the best player ever then it will never be resolved.
Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr, Richard, Hull were all the best players in their era but as long as the issue of best player ever is disputable then it impossible to solve the issue.
2007-10-10 21:09:47 · answer #3 · answered by bryan m 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NOpe, cuz if his season would have been better than Gretzky's he would ahve stayed healthy.....case closed...if Lemieux couldnt handle the pain that the Great one had to endure most of his career with a nagging back, then he didnt deserve to win .
Lemiux is not even half the player gretzky was.
2007-10-10 15:29:45 · answer #4 · answered by searchandseekanddestroy 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The most ridiculous season of Mario Lemieux's life was 2004-05, when he and Wayne Gretzky both betrayed the game that made them rich and famous by siding with the owners rather than the players. Every team in the league should have a ceremony where the numbers 99 and 66 are raised to the rafters, and then burned. They are disgraces to the game, and I don't care how good they were: They have gone to the Dark Side.
2007-10-10 15:39:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋