As of TODAY, where is McDavid on the all time list in your opinion?

[Fourier]

At this rate he will be right beside Lemieux. But in order to achieve that status he has to win a couple cups. It's a big ask for the inept organization he plays for.

Setting aside whether or not the Oilers are as inept as you say do you not see the obvious clash between your two bolded sentences?

 

[bleedgreen]

He’s in my top ten. Hopefully he stays healthy enough to be an obvious top ten with or without a cup. To me he’s a top five contender and things have to go wrong for him to not achieve it. He’s the best player since Lemieux imo. I don’t know that I would ever put him higher than Mario but his path currently takes him into the highest group possible. If he gets a cup and maintains this level he’s in the top five.

Today? I think he’s legit for top ten. Which is pretty amazing.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Thats still completely ignoring any postseason success, which most here will agree is insanely important for a players legacy.

If you're counting the number of Stanley Cups won? Yes, agreed.

But McDavid has already led the playoffs in scoring twice. A few of the players on that list never even did it once (Clarke, Jagr, Ovechkin). Several more did that only one time (Beliveau, Hull, Mikita, Messier, Crosby). A few match McDavid (Richard, Lemieux). Only a small handful have exceeded what McDavid did (Gretzky, Howe, Lafleur, Esposito). By this method, McDavid is already tied for #4 on the list. Plus he has a Conn Smythe. Only three players on the list (Gretzky, Lemieux and Crosby) have more (though some of them - like Beliveau - probably would have won multiple Conn Smythe's, had that trophy been around for their entire careers). The only player ahead of McDavid on both lists is Gretzky.

Ultimately, I think you and I are in agreement. McDavid has only played in 74 playoff games, and I want to see more longevity from him. But if he maintains this level of performance, I don't particularly care if he wins a Stanley Cup.

 

[amnesiac]

Did anyone read the OP?

TODAY

So a player 99th in scoring with 0 Cups is top 10 to ever play the game? Assuming you take the name away and simply list stats, no one would say that. This is insulting to the real greats.

He will get there, I have zero doubt barring a career ending injury, but he isnt yet. Take the goggles off.

3 Harts, 4 Art Rosses, 1 Conn Smythe in 9 seasons

already 3rd all-time in PPG so far, playing in a lower scoring era (than the 80s and early 90s). Of course we're yet to see what he can being in his 30s, so time will tell. But then we still consider say, Mike Bossy top 20 or 30 despite his short career. McDavid is undoubtedly ahead of Bossy at this point. Say what you want.

The "necessity" for winning the Cup to considered top 10 has become overrated now in a post cap 32 team era. It absolutely changes everything. Gretzky couldnt even win it after being traded. Bourque and Hasel only won when they were traded to a contender. Not Dionne's fault he was on a shit Kings team most of his career... Park, Iginla, Thronton, Stastny, etc etc

 

[Daximus]

While I agree it’s harder than ever, a lot of the old greats also won multiple. I still think the transcendent talents will usually find a way in part because teams will always keep trying to win with them and they’ll be elite for a long time. I’d be surprised if McDavid ended up never winning. Though I wouldn’t expect more than one at this point (though he might).

But they also won multiple in a league with far fewer teams, far lower salaries and no salary cap. There is a good argument to be maid that most of the teams these players played on would be nearly impossible to construct and keep in a modern cap world. And despite what many think absoutely none of them did it entirely by themselves. Even Gretzky as evidenced by his lack of Cups post Edmonton and Edmontons cup win without him.

 

[Regal]

But they also won multiple in a league with far fewer teams, far lower salaries and no salary cap. There is a good argument to be maid that most of the teams these players played on would be nearly impossible to construct and keep in a modern cap world. And despite what many think absoutely none of them did it entirely by themselves. Even Gretzky as evidenced by his lack of Cups post Edmonton and Edmontons cup win without him.

I’m not dismissing those advantages. My point is that those advantages often led to multiple cups. I think we’re still in a league where the best of the best should be able to win at least 1 in their career unless it’s significantly shortened. The cap’s lack of super teams also means it’s easier for a team to turn into a winner as they don’t have to face those super teams either. I think we’ll see a lot more Thornton/Iginla types without a cup. But we’ll still see the McDavid/Crosby/Ovechkin types win at least 1 unless the league adds a ton more teams.

 

[Daximus]

I’m not dismissing those advantages. My point is that those advantages often led to multiple cups. I think we’re still in a league where the best of the best should be able to win at least 1 in their career unless it’s significantly shortened. The cap’s lack of super teams also means it’s easier for a team to turn into a winner as they don’t have to face those super teams either. I think we’ll see a lot more Thornton/Iginla types without a cup. But we’ll still see the McDavid/Crosby/Ovechkin types win at least 1 unless the league adds a ton more teams.

Everything came together for Ovis win. If not for that one season good chance he retires cupless at this point. The cap enforces that some teams are just going to make bad decisions more often and in doing so limit their teams chances at winning a Cup. Of course McDavid has the power now to put himself in a better situation to achieve that goal. We'll see if he takes it or chooses to ride with the Oilers until the end. Balls in his court.

 

[rickthegoon]

For the longest time I felt Mario Lemieux was the best offensive talent I have ever seen. I started watching NHL hockey in 1990.

I'm not so sure anymore.

Lemieux in this new ‘ no holding by defenders allowed would probably get 300 pts/year.

 

[Voight]

He's a top-10 player and it's really not questionable. He's done things with a consistency that very, very few players have ever matched.

Or to put another way, he is at LEAST wherever Jagr is.

Example - last season was the first time in his career he did not finish 1st or 2nd in points.

(excluding his rookie year obviously)

 

[Regal]

Everything came together for Ovis win. If not for that one season good chance he retires cupless at this point. The cap enforces that some teams are just going to make bad decisions more often and in doing so limit their teams chances at winning a Cup. Of course McDavid has the power now to put himself in a better situation to achieve that goal. We'll see if he takes it or chooses to ride with the Oilers until the end. Balls in his court.

Ovechkin had multiple good teams and won with arguably the worst team he had in a three year period. He certainly could have won more with the right breaks. And almost every cup in the cap era is pretty much about “everything coming together”. But if you have a superstar to build around for 15 years it means there’s lots of time for that everything to come together. And having the best player in the world is always going to be an advantage in any playoff series.

And to be clear, I’m not saying McDavid should be punished historically if he doesn’t win, I just don’t think it’s become as difficult for this level of player as you’re suggesting.

 

[McOvechking]

In terms of pure on-ice skill he's clearly #1. In terms of legacy and career, probably in the 5-7 range. If your idea of the greatest hockey player is some combination of both those factors, he's probably 3rd behind Gretzky and Lemieux

 

[Mike Liut]

He will never pass Gretzky and Lemieux for me without at least 2 cups

 

[Cup or Bust]

How many players if they were 18 years old and I could pick any player in NHL history to be my teams franchise player to start a team? It would be between him, Gretzky, and Lemieux and no other players would get any consideration.

 

[T REX]

As of TODAY there are plenty ahead of him. The way he’s tracking though is a diff story,

very profound statement

so much can happen

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Example - last season was the first time in his career he did not finish 1st or 2nd in points.

(excluding his rookie year obviously)

And he was still 2nd in PPG

 

[BruinDust]

Lemieux in this new ‘ no holding by defenders allowed would probably get 300 pts/year.

Maybe, it's a much different game now. Would the methodical brilliance of Lemieux translate as well in this faster paced NHL? I don't know the answer to that. Both are incredible offensive talents in their own right.

 

[Daximus]

Ovechkin had multiple good teams and won with arguably the worst team he had in a three year period. He certainly could have won more with the right breaks. And almost every cup in the cap era is pretty much about “everything coming together”. But if you have a superstar to build around for 15 years it means there’s lots of time for that everything to come together. And having the best player in the world is always going to be an advantage in any playoff series.

And to be clear, I’m not saying McDavid should be punished historically if he doesn’t win, I just don’t think it’s become as difficult for this level of player as you’re suggesting.

Hockey is far to random to say that any one factor can guarantee anything. In the modern era just because you have the best player doesn't mean you are guaranteed to win anything. I'd say its far more likely that McDavid never even sees another finals again yet alone wins.

 

[wetcoast]

The problem with these posts is that lack of specification regarding what we are even ranking here. Is it skill, points, or significance to a particular franchise? You're not going to get a consensus when everyone is ranking him based on something different.

It's a problem that won't go away but I find that most people are looking at everything, peak, prime, career, playoffs ect... although some weigh things completely differently at times.

This is also one of those journeys is more important than the destination type of things because there will never be agreement and more divergence when we go down from 1,2,3,4 ect...

 

[benfranklin]

If you're counting the number of Stanley Cups won? Yes, agreed.

But McDavid has already led the playoffs in scoring twice. A few of the players on that list never even did it once (Clarke, Jagr, Ovechkin). Several more did that only one time (Beliveau, Hull, Mikita, Messier, Crosby). A few match McDavid (Richard, Lemieux). Only a small handful have exceeded what McDavid did (Gretzky, Howe, Lafleur, Esposito). By this method, McDavid is already tied for #4 on the list. Plus he has a Conn Smythe. Only three players on the list (Gretzky, Lemieux and Crosby) have more (though some of them - like Beliveau - probably would have won multiple Conn Smythe's, had that trophy been around for their entire careers). The only player ahead of McDavid on both lists is Gretzky.

Ultimately, I think you and I are in agreement. McDavid has only played in 74 playoff games, and I want to see more longevity from him. But if he maintains this level of performance, I don't particularly care if he wins a Stanley Cup.

Leading the playoffs in scoring is not as much of a flex as you think it is. The Conn Smythe wins are though and he has one, albeit losing the Cup.

21-22, lead the playoffs in scoring. Didnt make it to the Finals.

Took 7 games to take down LA in round 1 - 14 points
Took 5 games to take down CGY in round 2 - 12 points
Lost in 4 games to COL in round 3 - 7 points

 

[benfranklin]

The problem with these posts is that lack of specification regarding what we are even ranking here. Is it skill, points, or significance to a particular franchise? You're not going to get a consensus when everyone is ranking him based on something different.

I think thats where Im annoyed with this thread. The title specifically says "TODAY". So I read that if his career ends today, where does he rank?

If you showed me only the below stats without a name or emotions or eye test or whatever, Id honestly say top 100 for sure, top 75 probably, and top 50 you can argue based off the individual trophies. Sadly needs more games played to rise higher. The potential is obviously there based on ppg and awards, but not the longevity for total points and most importantly Cup wins.

168th all time in goals - 342
70th all time in assists - 661
99th all time in scoring - 1003
1.51 career ppg
5 Art Ross
3 Hart
4 Lindsay
1 Rocket

74 Playoff games played
37 goals
80 assists
117 points
1.58 ppg
1 Conn Smythe
0 Cups

A random off the top of my head example:

Selanne. Is McDavid more skilled? Not even close slam dunk ofcourse. Does he have the better career thus far to be ahead of him? No.

12th all time goals - 684
42nd all time assists - 773
18th all time scoring - 1457
1 CUP!

And I bet Selanne is one who we would all struggle to include in our top 20, 30, or even 50 of all time. But sure McDavid is ahead of him already for reasons...

 

[dr robbie]

I'd say he's probably the best player without a Cup at this point (sorry Dionne). But his last of longevity and lack of finishing the job really holds him back. Success is why players play. Everything else secondary. Probably in the 15-20 range for me.

I do see him almost certainly cracking the top 10. Ceiling is probably #5 with a good/decent trajectory and at least a Cup win. I really don't see him breaking into the Rushmore without something unnatural occurring.

 

[Green]

At this rate he will be right beside Lemieux. But in order to achieve that status he has to win a couple cups. It's a big ask for the inept organization he plays for.

No, he needs 1 cup, even that can be questioned, these GOATs of all time mainly won their cups when there were 6-22 teams in the league, it is alot harder to win a cup now, if McDavid wins 1 cup and gets 2,000 points he is definitely #2 behind Gretzky, 2000 points and no Cups i'd probably rank him 3, if he retired today I would still say 4-5 or something