You're not wrong. After watching Sid's entire career, I've noticed a small but what I think is an important difference between them: Crosby always makes his linemates better. McDavid succeeds in spite of them.
mhm.
Like i've said. I give lumps to everyone. Hockey isn't basketball and stuff obviously, and I am not saying that McDavid has to do everything himself. But when you are scoreless (Pointless?) in 3 games, your defensive play isn't alll there, that's not on Holland, that's not on Goaltending, that's not on the defense. That's on
McDavid. Great that he scored 100 points and will probably win the Hart (because apparently Hart = Scoring)
But tomorrow, will McDavid go super sayian mode and score like 3-4 goals, and drive plays and at least
offensively get the oilers into it? I dunno. Will he throw hits and be engaged? I dunno. If it were Phil, or Sid, or McKinnon or Matthews, i could say yeah for sure i know what would happen - but I dunno what would McDavid would do
I said it ages ago. and people gave me flack. If we had to choose one - McDavid or Matthews, I would choose Matthews. It's not a Leaf-y thing. it's just how Matthews plays. And outside of his first playoff series (where i'd still argue half his issue was that he was still suffering from injuries), Matthews picks up his play in the playoffs. He's benefitting from having a better rounded support system. but i don't get the feeling if it were reverse Matthews would be pointless in 3 games facing elimination either.
Honestly, I hope for Edmonton's sake I hope McDavid can pick it up and they can force a game seven but...