It seems every time I look on this app, I see fierce Gretzky/Lemieux debates taking place. It must be the middle of August for hockey fans. But I, too, am bored, so I will now add my 2 cents. I think it's all based on how you define greatness. Gretzky is, without question, the most accomplished player in hockey history and had the greatest career in hockey history. He changed the game forever, dominated in ways never seen before, and produced numbers we'll never see again. But was he really the best player ever? Lemieux was so much more physically gifted that it's comical to even debate. What did Gretzky do better? Playmaking/passing, maybe, though it should be noted Lemieux was, at worst, the second best passer/playmaker in hockey history and could play that game as well as Gretzky if he felt like it. He was simply more of a shoot-first player than Gretzky, though very much a hybrid in that regard. And sure, Lemieux wasn't above taking a night off from time to time, something Gretzky was never accused of. But let's look at other facets: * Goal scoring in general? Lemieux by a mile * Shot power? Lemieux by a mile * Shot accuracy? Lemieux * Size/strength? Lemieux by a mile * Puck protection/reach? Lemieux by a mile * Breakaways? Lemieux by a country mile * Faceoffs? Draw * Defense? Lemieux (watch '91 and '92 playoffs if you disagree) * Hands? Lemieux * Skating? Lemieux, probably * Slap shot? Lemieux * Wrist shot? Lemieux * Backhand? Lemieux * Toughness: Lemieux * Clutch performance? Draw * Imagination? Draw (both utter geniuses) Then we must ask ourselves certain questions. Who had the better teammates from Day 1? Who was protected more by the NHL from Day 1? Who, based on size and physical ability, would have dominated 100 years ago or in this era more? Who else would have clearly been the best player in hockey after taking 3 1/2 years off before returning at age 35, putting up 35-41-76 in 43 games at the height of the dead puck era? Who else would have put up 30-26-56 in the next 20 games after missing two months due to cancer radiation treatments? I think these answers are pretty clear. There is a what-if quality to Lemieux's career that is part of his lore, and it's not Gretzky's fault. Gretzky was durable and generally had great health. Lemieux did not have anything close to good health, some of which was his fault. He smoked during the first eight years of his career and didn't always handle his back injuries in the manner his doctors asked. Part of this is on him, but he was also mauled and physically abused to the extreme, and the league did nothing to protect him. He played in the violent Patrick Division. He wasn't Gretzky. He was French. In those days, that was a rough combination. Much like Babe Ruth in baseball, the NHL always protected Gretzky. To this day, this is still the case. And, of course, it was not Lemieux's fault that he was diagnosed with cancer at 27. Physically, he was never quite the same after the diagnosis, his spring of 1993 scoring binge not withstanding. I was raised in Pittsburgh during the 1980s and 1990s. So, yes, I am admittedly biased. But I also know what I saw. And that was Lemieux's greatest appeal; to see him in person was to understand that you were seeing something that you'd never see again. If you took a bunch of aliens from outer space and invited them to a hockey game, and if no one was wearing numbers or names, they would all just fixate on him. Because you didn't need to understand the game to know he was different and better than everyone else. Who is the best player of all time? We'll never know. We have fun conversations like this all the time and there's no way to conclude. Everyone has their own opinion, their own view, their own philosophy. No one will ever accomplish more than Gretzky. He has more assists than anyone else has points, I've heard. I know. And it's amazing. No one had more great games than Gretzky and I'm hardly here to knock him. Legendary player, obviously, and a great ambassador for the game. But Lemieux, at his best and healthiest -- and sometimes, even when he wasn't healthy -- played hockey at level that has never been seen and that Gretzky wasn't physically capable of reaching. Who is the greatest of all time? Some say Gretzky. Some say Lemieux. Some saw Orr. Some say Howe. Some of the young people will say McDavid or Crosby. No one is right or wrong. But no one could do things on a hockey rink that Mario Lemieux could do, often in extremely compromised health. I'll go with him every time.

Sidney Crosby turns 39 today. On the captain’s birthday, I took a look at where he ranks in hockey (and Pittsburgh sports) history. He doesn’t have many equals. Free for all to read. Check it out here: nytimes.com/athletic/7471936…