Mastodon
@National Hockey League

Do you agree/disagree with Maurice Richard?



Do you agree/disagree with Maurice Richard?

by info-warz

36 Comments

  1. random_name23631

    Different eras in sports are always hard to compare. Original six had less teams but also drew from a much smaller talent pool.

  2. rattlehead42069

    Lol no. The talent pool in professional sports and the NHL in particular has become way stronger than it ever has been as the years go on.

    Just Gretzky was so far above people in his era. In Richard’s era half the players smoked between periods. They wouldn’t hold a candle to Gretzky’s era or today’s era of players. And as it stands now, the competition is so tight, you basically have every play on the caliber of Gretzky was in his time, so it’s way harder to stand head and shoulders above everyone else in the league.

  3. mildlysceptical22

    He had a point. There were only six teams so the talent level was the best of the best. The game was also played differently then. Wingers stayed on the wings and defensemen stayed home. The introduction of European players brought the cycle to the offense, and Mr. Orr changed the game for defensemen forever. Could today’s players play in the Original Six? I think today’s players are far greater skaters and have stick handling skills that would have earned them two handers and crosschecks from the old helmetless crew.

  4. imaybeacatIRl

    I can’t say I agree or disagree. Kinda impossible to compare… but I will suggest that Gretzky’s pomp took place when the league wasn’t super fit/super talented, and uber talented players stood out like giants.

  5. Serious_Reason5312

    Every era incomparably different. Best stat is percentage difference from 2nd best of that year or era Everyone had tiny leather pad goalies to abuse and a expansion diluted nhl but he did it the best of that little era and got a head start on big stats because that era was higher scoring sure It all makes ovi’s consistency really impressive through lower scoring times

  6. Katprizov

    I agree with the statement that the game has changed and it’s hard to compare. Disagree mostly with the rest. Improvement in equipment, material science, nutrition and training makes every player better now. There’s a higher level of execution today than there ever was before. That goes for Gretzky’s era also. Typical statement from an old guy without humility. He does have a few records still though, and the trophy named after him. I’m here on a pocket computer and I played in high school.

  7. GrizzlyIsland22

    The way Richard puts it makes it sound like there were the same amount of people playing hockey in both eras, so when there are only 6 teams, those teams must be saturated with talent. I don’t necessarily think the talent pool was that different. The league expanded to that many teams because hockey had grown in popularity. Fewer people played hockey growing up in Richard’s era, as more people became interested in playing the sport, the talent pool grew as well.

  8. Superb-Possibility-9

    The Rocket was a proud man; but Gretzky was the Greatest

  9. Jimmy_October

    Short version: Comparing eras is hard.

    The message that needs for some reason to still be delivered: Wayne Gretzky was not only the most dominant hockey player to ever play the game, he is the most dominant professional athlete of all time – so far above his contemporaries it is nearly incomprehensible.

    AND he is a statesman, excellent teammate, and top tier ambassador for the game.

    He is such a fuckin beauty. I am SO LUCKY to have watched him play

  10. AintIGR8

    If it was only 6 teams 3 would have moved for sure LA would need a team as would so Detroit is hockey less Chicago would have likely moved as well and you would still have a one Canadian team but not 2 the US dollar would have seen to that.

  11. PaversPaving

    McDavid would put up 350 points a season in Gretzky’s era

  12. FatherFenix

    I’ll disagree with the “fewer teams, tougher competition” notion he had. More teams, more competition, more depth of talent to compete against.

  13. adam2696

    You pick out the top players out of the original 6, all in their primes, and put them against pretty much any of today’s teams. I bet they lose 80%+. This to a lesser degree also goes for Gretzky.

  14. I disagree. Nothing about Gretzky is obvious. If scoring that many goals and assists were so easy, other talented players would have done it.

    No one ever did.

    Gretzky was a freak. Once in history. Had nothing to do with the level of competition. Gretzky was just too special.

  15. idrivea90schevy

    Gretzky would skate circles around those guys.

  16. AceConspirator

    He sounds like a bitter old bastard.

  17. Half_moon_die

    That’s the least glamorous trophy

  18. sportsjunkie75

    This is the same guy who says to my dad“ I suppose you want an autograph”. My dad said no lol

  19. secretrico

    it’s like the debate around petty/earnhardt/johnson and which of them is the greatest 7 time champ. all won their championships in different eras, but it’s pretty easy to see how earnhardt or johnson would’ve driven circles around most of the field that petty had to races against in his prime.

  20. chowmushi

    Absolutely true. When Grez started, the NHL had already expanded to 21 teams. From 6 a decade (well 12 years) before. Almost all the players were from Canada still. There just wasn’t that big a talent pool to fill all the jobs in the NHL. That’s why goons and Philadelphia Flyer- style hockey became a thing. Those goons weren’t very good but they could still contribute by roughing up their opponents. Someone like Gretz had it easy.

  21. PersimmonMindless

    I played during neither era, so… I have no idea. Rules were also different. Tech. Blah blah was also different.

  22. FormerCollegeDJ

    Rocket Richard was correct at the time. The NHL WAS watered down in the early 1980s relative to the Original Six era, though it wasn’t as bad as it was in the mid-1970s when the number of NHL + WHA teams was even higher (peaking at 32 teams in 1974-75).

    In the early 1980s, the NHL had not yet had the wide influx of non-North American talent that it would have even 10-15 years later. Additionally, the U.S. didn’t produce as many hockey players at the time as it would in future decades. The relative homogeneity of the league can be seen when you look at the nationalities of the NHL players in the early 1980s relative to today or even the early to mid-1990s after the Iron Curtain fell. A very high percentage of players who played in the NHL before 1990, and especially before 1980, were Canadian.

    There WAS a deeper talent pool of Canadian players in the early 1980s than there was a quarter-century earlier during Richard’s era, but the deeper Canadian talent pool was more than offset by the much greater number of NHL teams.

    I’d actually say that even today, with a much, much wider and deeper talent pool, the average player in the 2022-23, 32 team NHL probably wasn’t as good as the average player in the 6 team NHL from say the mid-1950s to 1967. The talent pool today is probably 3-4 times greater than it was 60-70 years ago, but there also over 5x as many NHL teams as there were then.

    One final thought – the stretched talent pool in major league pro hockey (NHL + WHA) during the 1970s to early 1990s time period, especially from the creation of the WHA in 1972 to sometime in the late 1980s, is well-illustrated by the number of goons/fighters teams had on their rosters. It was common then for some players to rack up 200 to 300 penalty minutes per season, and fights were much, much more common. Much of that is because there weren’t enough truly talented players to fill all the rosters, so marginal talent players were able to fill the back end of rosters.

    The decline in fighting in the 1990s coincided with the much greater influx of talented European players entering the league. Within a few years, the marginal talent players who were on the team because of their fists were pushed out by more talented players, often non-Canadian players. It became a drawback, rather than an advantage, to load your roster with goons; you’d get beat on the scoreboard too often to gain benefit from literally beating the other team on the ice. Not coincidentally, the number of fights and overall penalty minutes declined dramatically from the beginning of the 1990s to the end of the decade, especially relative to 1970s and 1980s.

  23. Real_Armadillo_8143

    Interesting point.

    I do worry myself about the NHL desire to keep expanding. Consider adding 2 new teams means an extra 40-50 players in the league mixed throughout all teams that wouldn’t have been good enough for the show pre expansion.

  24. Drop_The_Puck

    Probably true, just like if he played today. He’d lead the league but probably wouldn’t have the same numbers. The 80’s were a unique time. I think the game was a lot rougher in the 40’s and 50’s when the Rocket played too.

  25. Flex1855

    I somewhat agree it’s comparable with 32 NHL teams today with at least 7 or 8 ahl teams worth of players in the NHL that shouldn’t be there

  26. RiflemanLax

    Richard fails to understand that even if the talent is stretched out, those more modern players would have the benefit of more modern training methods, more money thrown into training, and so on.

    Richard’s complaint doesn’t hold up.

    Different eras in sports are difficult to compare (modern NFL bench players for instance would murder starters from the 30s, 40s, etc.) but if I examine this further, I feel like I’d conclude Gretzky actually had it harder.

  27. TankDivision

    Lol nah. Players get better with every generation.

  28. Buttsquish

    Richard played and set his 50 goal in 50 game record during World War 2. Half the league was away at war to the point that the league was planning to shut down. The government had to beg the NHL to keep playing since it gave the soldiers and those at home something to look forward to. Richard and the Punchline was playing against 17 and 18 year olds.

    Once the league got back to normal, Richard was still very good, but absolutely not the world breaker he was when half the league was away.

    Gretzky would have scored 100 goals the year that Richard scored 50.

  29. Obie-Wun

    The game is different through different eras which makes it difficult to compare apples to apples. The two advantages that Gretzky has is his skating ability – easily as good or better than anyone in earlier eras. But, I think his on ice vision is truly what makes him better. He just sees the game on a different level. Sure, Gordies and Rocket’s era were hard, but so was the 80s with the level of clutching, grabbing, and goonery you can’t do now. 99 thrived during that time. I don’t remember him taking very many hard hits. Not that he couldn’t mix it up a bit, but he rarely ever got blindsided. The one thing that strikes me – Rocket couldn’t lift the puck back then. 99 without a wrist shot is definitely more limited, though I think he would have found a way to survive.

  30. YanksFanInSF

    Comparing across eras is incredibly difficult. It’s been said by others, but looking at ‘all time’ type stats there’s a reason why Gretz leads most (all?) scoring categories. Looking at the comparables in any era Wayne is still the benchmark. It’s insane what he accumulated. Every time I look at any ‘all-time’ list it’s like some amazing players (Ovi, Crosby, Jagr, etc), then Super Mario, then Gretzky. That’s just the list. It’s everyone else, then the elites (Richard/Ovi/Crosby are here), then Mario, then Wayne.

  31. marks519

    He’s 100% right. I hate their being 32 teams now with murmurs of even more (Houston, KC, Atlanta, QC).

    Even though talent is at an all time high it still waters down the product

  32. sheldonOrange

    if you dropped Maurice Richard in the modern day he wouldn’t make an ECHL team

Write A Comment