I grew up playing hockey. Wayne Gretzky (along with Bobby Hull) was my biggest NHL idol. He destroyed the record books, scored more goals (92) and assists (120 which he later eclipsed twice, the last being 163!!!) then ever thought possible one season for a total of 212 points (which he even topped with 215!) and then...

He had an 'off' year the critics said. After the 212 point season he only scored 196 points.

He had a total of 4 200+ point seasons. No one else has done that (Mario came close).

As Wayne got older he was always compared to HIMSELF, his past self, not anyone else in the NHL. Only to what he did. Because he wasn't doing THAT anymore. He was still exciting, incredibly smart and capable, just not on that level anymore. When he retired he was still the best passer in the game beyond anyone. But he was not The Great One of the 1980s.

It seems that this is what has happened to Keith. The biggest difference is Gretzky had highlight films that showed what he did (some of which are now on the internet as well as DVD). Now there is the internet and a lot of people weighing in with their opinions and, lapping tongue forbid, their observations from shows and live albums and live bootlegs and live DVDs.

So even if one didn't go to a show but does see a video, the movie or listens to the record, things are noticed, because the sound does not lie - crappy cell phone, some camcorder - the sound is the sound. Bad sound or not, bad notes and goofy licks and strange solos and good notes and great licks and great solos are audible. He's not this, he's only doing that, what the hell is he DOING?, that was great, he was on fire, etc...

That is what is happening. Instant society. Instant everything.

We all hear what we hear. We all make comments on it. One fact remains - Keith plays his guitar. He will continue. He's not the Keith of 1969, 1972 or 1982 or 1990. I think we are all well aware of that. So it's interesting. That is for sure.

THe biggest difference is... Gretzky retired when he knew that age and his condition made him sub-par...

[thepowergoats.com]

Keef best years might be yet to come.
Ya guys are all too focused on da guitarslingin' thang.

hard to compare athletes to musicians though - age 40 is "old" - they require more physically. keith doesn't need to be physically fit, but being mentally fit helps plus his fingers must hurt him.

let's not forget some blistering solos he did in '05. i think rest this year is just what he needs. as baboon suggested, let's not write him off yet.

He's not the Keith of 1969, 1972 or 1982 or 1990. I think we are all well aware of that. So it's interesting. That is for sure.


Nor is he the Keith of 1994, 1997, 2002,2005, 2006, 2007, nor the future Keith of 2009 and beyond.

All of nature changes. Everyone is differnt from everyone else AND from themselves. So why get so hung up with the negative criticism when we all know that is the nature of life. YOU TOO are going to get old. Is that bad, or is it just different??

Different. Which iswhy, in my opnion, they should re-think their whole approach next time. I do want a next time, and I hope it is good.



[thepowergoats.com]

Maybe you missed my point of the thread - that Keith is being compared to his past. That's all. I used Gretzky as a comparison because the critics compared him to his past.

Wayne Gretzky was never as good as some of the star russian players before his time. Eventhough it hard to compare with todays hockey where its harder to score.

Wayne Gretkzy is the greatest hockey player of all time.

[thepowergoats.com]

Only Canadian inbreeds think that... I remember Charlamov and Fisov way better than Gretzky and now Ovechkin. Also now Sweden's skilled players dominate hockey and Gretzky could not fit in among their best players.

Canadian "inbreeds" ? You're kidding, right ? Wow, what a classy remark...I'm loathe to get into the whole "who turns out the best hockey players" argument (Don Cherry was doing that on TV just moments ago and it's embarrassing)) and I think you're referring to Kharlamov and Fetisov when you speak of the great Russians of the 70's. There are of course many great Swedish hockey players( love Sundin and Forsberg today and Salming in the 70's was a hero to me!) but to suggest they "dominate" hockey and that Greztky "could not fit in" with them is beyond laughable.

And since you stated your case so artlessly I have no choice but to point out that Canada has won the World Juniors four years in a row (defeating, who was it, oh yeah, Sweden this year), the World Chamionship last year and the World Under-18 just yesterday, defeating Russia in the Gold Medal Game 8-0. I think Sweden were in the medal round. The consensus amongst the hockey experts , and not just Canadian hockey experts is that , while skilled players coming out of Canada were on the wane perhaps 10-15 years ago, that is far from the case now (check out Steve Stamkos, who will be going No. 1 in this years' NHL draft) Again, I really don't dig the "we do this better than you" arguments but your post was so misguided I couldn't ignore it.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-25 04:05 by andrewm.

Hockey is a religion in Canada and its unbelievale they dont come up with better players. When it comes to the juniors, who cares? Noone except for Canadians cares and thats the junior comparison. Yes Gretsky and some other Canadian hockey players are skilled and good but to compare them to top Russian and Swedes and a couple of Finns and Checks is arguable or ridiculus, but in the top Russians and now Swedes are the best.

Keith for this matter is maybe a Canadian Gretsky cause he is the best to his fans and not to many others.

hey skipstone
i think you said it wonderfully in your original post...

glad to see awareness of different view points in the iorr arena

I'm trying to be objective here and I'm genuinely curious as to whom you would be referring to when you cite Swedes as the current dominant players. If anything, it seems the best Swedish players are in the twilight of their careers-again, I'm thinking of Forsberg, Sundin, Alfredsson, Naslund. The Top 20 Points leaders in the NHL this year comprise 3 Swedes, 5 Russians, 1 Czech and 11 Canadians. So, comparing the top Canadians to the other European nations is far from ridiculous. I'm just trying to understand your line of reasoning and I can't grasp it.

As for the juniors, why wouldn't you care when these players are the stars of tomorrow ? Finally, to Gretzky: the man frustrated the heck out of me when he pretty much singlehandedly eliminated the Leafs in the '93 semi-finals (in the twilight of his career) and again I believe I'm being completely objective here when I say I'm not sure how you could possibly suggest he's not the best hockey player ever (unless you were to argue Howe or Bobby Orr). The numbers simply don't lie.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-27 23:44 by andrewm.

Please spell Wayne Gretzky correctly - there is no S in Gretzky.

And he is unanimously the number one player of the game - above ANYONE - of all time. Your little Europinion is just that - jibberish. Do some homework and find out what some of the old timers have said about Gretzky.

Aside from that, who is the last hockey player in the world to have scored, in one game, from the right faceoff dot and left faceoff dot on the puck drop before it hit the ice as well as from behind the net bouncing the puck off the back of the goalie's head? There's all kinds of neat things he did that no one ever had done before.

Just accept it - he had the best vision for everything. It's why he was called The Great One.

Got that right, skipstone.Y'know, I'd never been referred to as an "inbreed" before.People say the darnedest things on this here internet.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-04-28 00:58 by andrewm.