Toggle sidebar

C Connor McDavid - Erie Otters, OHL (2015 Draft) II

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's surprising that McDavid has a 1.61 PPG pace when two of his teammates, Dane Fox & Connor Brown, have a much higher PPG of 1.77 and 1.96 PPG respectively and are #1 and #2 in OHL scoring while McDavid is #10.

John Tavares for comparison sakes had a 2.0 PPG by the end of his 2nd year in the OHL (also was let in a year early but was about 8 months younger than McDavid). Tavares led his team in scoring by a large margin and finished #2 in the OHL in points behind only Patrick Kane (145 points to Tavares' 134). Two of his teamates were Brett MacLean (1.47 PPG, 10th in league scoring) and Cal Clutterbuck (1.37 PPG, 19th in league scoring).

Tavares, statistically, was far ahead of McDavid at this point but perhaps McDavid's skill-set will lead to an easier transition into the NHL. Tavares' hype also slightly regressed as the scouts had plenty of time to pick apart his game as he was under the microscope for years (which will likely happen to McDavid, except his flaws are far different than Tavares') and as he outgrew the OHL.

I think at the time, Tavares was a better prospect than McDavid. He's a great prospect and I could see him having a bigger impact than Tavares did for his first 5-years (similar to a Patrick Kane level), but I expect Tavares to have the greater career after that.

Both are the two best prospects since Crosby, but I think Tavares will continue to develop well into his mid 20's and be a top 3 player in the NHL soon enough. McDavid has the more high-end skill set so he'll explode earlier in his career, but will likely not improve the way Tavares has/will.
 
Larry Hoover said:
It's surprising that McDavid has a 1.61 PPG pace when two of his teammates, Dane Fox & Connor Brown, have a much higher PPG of 1.77 and 1.96 PPG respectively and are #1 and #2 in OHL scoring while McDavid is #10.

John Tavares for comparison sakes had a 2.0 PPG by the end of his 2nd year in the OHL (also was let in a year early but was about 8 months younger than McDavid). Tavares led his team in scoring by a large margin and finished #2 in the OHL in points behind only Patrick Kane (145 points to Tavares' 134). Two of his teamates were Brett MacLean (1.47 PPG, 10th in league scoring) and Cal Clutterbuck (1.37 PPG, 19th in league scoring).

Tavares, statistically, was far ahead of McDavid at this point but perhaps McDavid's skill-set will lead to an easier transition into the NHL. Tavares' hype also slightly regressed as the scouts had plenty of time to pick apart his game as he was under the microscope for years (which will likely happen to McDavid, except his flaws are far different than Tavares') and as he outgrew the OHL.

I think at the time, Tavares was a better prospect than McDavid. He's a great prospect and I could see him having a bigger impact than Tavares did for his first 5-years (similar to a Patrick Kane level), but I expect Tavares to have the greater career after that.

Both are the two best prospects since Crosby, but I think Tavares will continue to develop well into his mid 20's and be a top 3 player in the NHL soon enough. McDavid has the more high-end skill set so he'll explode earlier in his career, but will likely not improve the way Tavares has/will.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I find it really odd that he's being touted as better than Crosby, he's literally nowhere close to where Crosby was at the same age based on actual performance. Not even close.
 
Fred Taylor said:
Yeah, I find it really odd that he's being touted as better than Crosby, he's literally nowhere close to where Crosby was at the same age based on actual performance. Not even close.
Click to expand...

I find it odd that people still compare prospects purely on numbers when scouts repeatedly keep saying that they place very little stock in statistics. Scoring was inflated across all three leagues compared to today, and Crosby was tearing up teams / defenseman in an inferior league overall. Comparing numbers in this situation is silly. Sportsnet / Gare Joyce put "Better than Crosby" on the cover to sell magazines.

The Western Conference in the OHL is very deep this year. Not too many pushovers. When Erie does see a weaker team, they have beaten up on them (9 goals v Kitchener last week, 7 and 6 vs Sarnia, etc)

Dane Fox would have nowhere near 25 goals in 25 games if he was playing with someone other than 97. Guelph is scoring about 5 per game and his linemates are still 1-2 in scoring.

The finish will come... this overall goal total may not look great by the end of the season but by no means has his development stunted or slowed. Watch him live or on TV... he does something every game, and in some cases every shift, that nobody else has the ability to do. Last Friday in London he put a spin move on veteran dman Zach Bell below the goal line and got a shot on net without being touched. The quickness and elusiveness he has makes you go :amazed: at times, and that's just one aspect of his game.
 
Kind of a random observation, I have never seen McDavid play on TV (at least not very long) or live, but I try to keep up with him by watching the highlights of all the goals/assists he gets. Not saying that qualifies me as a scout in any way, but one thing I notice he does incredibly well is position his stick away from defenders on the rush, and 'chip' the puck just out of their reach but in a spot where he can either shoot or explode past them. It's a skill that lets him blow by any defenseman in the OHL and will eventually translate to the NHL.

Erie plays the IceDogs two more times at home this year so I hope to go out and see him play in person.
 
doogie24 said:
I find it odd that people still compare prospects purely on numbers when scouts repeatedly keep saying that they place very little stock in statistics. Scoring was inflated across all three leagues compared to today, and Crosby was tearing up teams / defenseman in an inferior league overall. Comparing numbers in this situation is silly. Sportsnet / Gare Joyce put "Better than Crosby" on the cover to sell magazines.

The Western Conference in the OHL is very deep this year. Not too many pushovers. When Erie does see a weaker team, they have beaten up on them (9 goals v Kitchener last week, 7 and 6 vs Sarnia, etc)

Dane Fox would have nowhere near 25 goals in 25 games if he was playing with someone other than 97. Guelph is scoring about 5 per game and his linemates are still 1-2 in scoring.

The finish will come... this overall goal total may not look great by the end of the season but by no means has his development stunted or slowed. Watch him live or on TV... he does something every game, and in some cases every shift, that nobody else has the ability to do. Last Friday in London he put a spin move on veteran dman Zach Bell below the goal line and got a shot on net without being touched. The quickness and elusiveness he has makes you go :amazed: at times, and that's just one aspect of his game.
Click to expand...

Not saying I disagree with the entire post, but this argument has been debunked countless times. Scoring was actually lower in 2004 and the Q has seen lower scoring averages than the OHL in recent years. Not to mention the next closest point total in the Q when Crosby was 16 for a player not on his line was 37 points less than him.

People seriously underrate how badly Crosby ripped up the CHL at 16. Statistically it was much more impressive than what McDavid has shown so far, and that was as a rookie 9 months younger than McDavid is currently in his 2nd year.

Again, not saying those reasons are distinctly why I believe Crosby was better, but they do hold weight.
 
Breakfast of Champs said:
Not saying I disagree with the entire post, but this argument has been debunked countless times. Scoring was actually lower in 2004 and the Q has seen lower scoring averages than the OHL in recent years. Not to mention the next closest point total in the Q when Crosby was 16 for a player not on his line was 37 points less than him.

People seriously underrate how badly Crosby ripped up the CHL at 16. Statistically it was much more impressive than what McDavid has shown so far, and that was as a rookie 9 months younger than McDavid is currently in his 2nd year.

Again, not saying those reasons are distinctly why I believe Crosby was better, but they do hold weight.
Click to expand...


But c'mon guys. Anybody can see McDavid's superior talent level compared to Crosby. Simply, he has more natural talent: first, he is much better skater, that effortless fluid stride, incredible agility and speed/acceleration at that young age - when he gains more strength (without sacrificing his mobility) - well, huh! --Yes, Crosby is allegedly a great skater though it doesn't actually look like it; his legs are like tree trunks, his skating is a sheer exercise in power/strength, nothing effortless there, nothing smooth nor fluid; while his supposedly has great edge work he isn't the most agile or shifty skater, either - how could he be with those three trunk legs and stiff looking skating? McDavid's lateral movement is on other level. --Secondly, McDavid's stickhandling is much better: same fluid smoothness characterizes his stickwork as his skating - and those combined is just awesome to watch and result in top-notch puck moving and dangling ability - something Crosby can only dream about. Thirdly, as implied - it's obvious that Crosby's better stats in the Q are due to him being much more physically developed than McDavid at that age. And his shot was already much better - hence, McDavid's mediocre goal totals so far. -- But this kid has much more room to grow and improve on these physical aspects of the game than Crosby had. So: - It's should be clear that Connor McDavid really IS better than Crosby, and will be. (Both have top-notch hockey iq.)
 
Loffer said:
But c'mon guys. Anybody can see McDavid's superior talent level compared to Crosby. Simply, he has more natural talent: first, he is much better skater, that effortless fluid stride, incredible agility and speed/acceleration at that young age - when he gains more strength (without sacrificing his mobility) - well, huh! --Yes, Crosby is allegedly a great skater though it doesn't actually look like it; his legs are like tree trunks, his skating is a sheer exercise in power/strength, nothing effortless there, nothing smooth nor fluid; while his supposedly has great edge work he isn't the most agile or shifty skater, either - how could he be with those three trunk legs and stiff looking skating? McDavid's lateral movement is on other level. --Secondly, McDavid's stickhandling is much better: same fluid smoothness characterizes his stickwork as his skating - and those combined is just awesome to watch and result in top-notch puck moving and dangling ability - something Crosby can only dream about. Thirdly, as implied - it's obvious that Crosby's better stats in the Q are due to him being much more physically developed than McDavid at that age. And his shot was already much better - hence, McDavid's mediocre goal totals so far. -- But this kid has much more room to grow and improve on these physical aspects of the game than Crosby had. So: - It's should be clear that Connor McDavid really IS better than Crosby, and will be. (Both have top-notch hockey iq.)
Click to expand...

Is this one of those posts that's missing the :sarcasm: icon?

Seriously, name another generational or near generational talent that hadn't put themselves clearly above the pack at age 16.

Will physical maturity make that much of a difference?
 
doogie24 said:
I find it odd that people still compare prospects purely on numbers when scouts repeatedly keep saying that they place very little stock in statistics. Scoring was inflated across all three leagues compared to today, and Crosby was tearing up teams / defenseman in an inferior league overall.
Click to expand...

This is a pretty bold assertion to make. Do you have any quantitative evidence to support this or is this a purely qualitative assessment? We've seen what Crosby has done in the NHL and how his dominance in an "inferior league" has translated to the pros. We've also seen how John Tavares' dominance of a supposedly better, non-inflated league has been much slower to translate to the NHL. So you'll have to explain yourself when you suggest that a player in McDavid - whose performance is far below Tavares at the same age - should be in the same conversation as Crosby. It's all fine and good to dismiss stats but you offer no other measuring stick to compare players on. Should it be based on their individual skills like skating, vision, shot? The "eye test" fails because you are watching one player today while the other played 10 years ago. If you are going to dismiss the validity of stats - which is foolish to do - you should at least offer some alternative source for your POV.
 
daver said:
Is this one of those posts that's missing the :sarcasm: icon?

Seriously, name another generational or near generational talent that hadn't put themselves clearly above the pack at age 16.

Will physical maturity make that much of a difference?
Click to expand...


As I said, if his two team mates, Brown & Fox, are the top scorers of the league right now it should be obvious that McDavid being already on a different level than those two - will go on a tear any time now and win this race easily. I bet he will have clearly the highest PPG in the league come the postseason. Mark my words.
 
Loffer said:
But c'mon guys. Anybody can see McDavid's superior talent level compared to Crosby. Simply, he has more natural talent: first, he is much better skater, that effortless fluid stride, incredible agility and speed/acceleration at that young age - when he gains more strength (without sacrificing his mobility) - well, huh! --Yes, Crosby is allegedly a great skater though it doesn't actually look like it; his legs are like tree trunks, his skating is a sheer exercise in power/strength, nothing effortless there, nothing smooth nor fluid; while his supposedly has great edge work he isn't the most agile or shifty skater, either - how could he be with those three trunk legs and stiff looking skating? McDavid's lateral movement is on other level. --Secondly, McDavid's stickhandling is much better: same fluid smoothness characterizes his stickwork as his skating - and those combined is just awesome to watch and result in top-notch puck moving and dangling ability - something Crosby can only dream about. Thirdly, as implied - it's obvious that Crosby's better stats in the Q are due to him being much more physically developed than McDavid at that age. And his shot was already much better - hence, McDavid's mediocre goal totals so far. -- But this kid has much more room to grow and improve on these physical aspects of the game than Crosby had. So: - It's should be clear that Connor McDavid really IS better than Crosby, and will be. (Both have top-notch hockey iq.)
Click to expand...


Assuming you aren't being sarcastic ...

This is faulty reasoning. First you say Crosby's skating is worse than McDavids when actually it is merely different. You are merely describing differences in technique - effortlessness, fluidity, etc - not differences in effectiveness. Many players are smoother, more fluid than Crosby and still nowhere as effective.

Your comparisons of their stickhandling is equally poor. You say McDavid's is light years ahead of Crosby's but not at what level. If you are comparing one player at the NHL level and the other in junior ... well give your head a shake. Players simplify their stickhandling at the NHL level and avoid many if the little dipsy doodle moves they do in junior. McDavid may look better in junior today but he too will have to simplify his game once he is facing NHL d on a nightly basis.

As for the size/strength argument, there may be some validity to that but at this point I see it as a plus for Crosby and a question mark for McDavid. He will need to develop the strength and weight to play at the same level without losing any of his speed and agility. He should be able to do it but only time will tell.
 
I hate the Crosby comparison, whether it be style of play, or numbers.

Yes, he was better statistically. He's not going to touch Crosby's numbers, or accomplishments at the age of 25 - 87 has set the bar in that regard. His 102 assist season in 05 is absolutely crazy.

But does anyone really think the Q is a better league than the OHL, depth wise? Im standing behind that. The poster tried to compare Crosby to McDavid by saying he tore up the Q, which I felt was a bit unfair since 97 plays in a better league with better defenseman. Yes it's difficult to back that up but I would guess if you go back 10 years you will see much more quality defenseman in the NHL from the O than you do the Q.

I'm convinced that you could put McDavid on the first line of any team in the OHL and he would inflate the numbers of the other two players. He makes guys around him better, simple as that.
 
doogie24 said:
I hate the Crosby comparison, whether it be style of play, or numbers.

Yes, he was better statistically. He's not going to touch Crosby's numbers, or accomplishments at the age of 25 - 87 has set the bar in that regard. His 102 assist season in 05 is absolutely crazy.

But does anyone really think the Q is a better league than the OHL, depth wise? Im standing behind that. The poster tried to compare Crosby to McDavid by saying he tore up the Q, which I felt was a bit unfair since 97 plays in a better league with better defenseman. Yes it's difficult to back that up but I would guess if you go back 10 years you will see much more quality defenseman in the NHL from the O than you do the Q.

I'm convinced that you could put McDavid on the first line of any team in the OHL and he would inflate the numbers of the other two players. He makes guys around him better, simple as that.
Click to expand...

So why haven't Kane and Tavares ripped up the NHL like Crosby? They put up some gaudy numbers in the supposedly tougher O.
 
So, Crosby and McDavid are not really comparables, after all. They are not similar kind of players and never will be. They have different styles and to some extent different strengths. They will play different kind of game. McDavid is more finesse kind of player than Crosby who has some grinder in him.

So, will McDavid be better than Crosby? At least, he will be more exciting to watch, more dynamic, flashier. But to reach or top Crosby's point totals is a different matter. Only time will tell. And is it so important? Nope.
 
daver said:
So why haven't Kane and Tavares ripped up the NHL like Crosby? They put up some gaudy numbers in the supposedly tougher O.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that they have been, but I know what you're trying to say. And as much as I loathe Crosby, he does have unreal talent. Is it any wonder that everyone since has been compared to him, or labeled as "the next Crosby."
 
Hf users, you don't have to make a comparison. If it doesn't fit, don't make it because all you're going to do is confuse people that haven't seen him play yet and raise the bar unnecessarily high. On another note, can't wait to see this kid suit up for team Canada be it this year or the next. WOOOO!!!!!
 
doogie24 said:
I hate the Crosby comparison, whether it be style of play, or numbers.

Yes, he was better statistically. He's not going to touch Crosby's numbers, or accomplishments at the age of 25 - 87 has set the bar in that regard. His 102 assist season in 05 is absolutely crazy.

But does anyone really think the Q is a better league than the OHL, depth wise? Im standing behind that. The poster tried to compare Crosby to McDavid by saying he tore up the Q, which I felt was a bit unfair since 97 plays in a better league with better defenseman. Yes it's difficult to back that up but I would guess if you go back 10 years you will see much more quality defenseman in the NHL from the O than you do the Q.

I'm convinced that you could put McDavid on the first line of any team in the OHL and he would inflate the numbers of the other two players. He makes guys around him better, simple as that.
Click to expand...

Obviously, everyone knows this. But its to the point right now that players on his team are scoring more points than him. I haven't been watching Erie play but I'm willing to bet its somewhat of a 2-ways street in this regard, meaning Brown and Fox also bring up McDavids point totals to an extent.

Crosby did much more statistically with lesser linemates, on a much worse team.

Again, I'm not saying the Q is "better", but it is definitely a comparable league, especially when you factor in the linemates as well as the fact that it was the season right before the lockout that was aimed at raising scoring levels.

Anyone who diminishes Crosby's point totals becuase of the league he played in is just looking for excuses as to why McDavid hasn't produced the same way.

Also, to the poster above stating McDavid's "clear advantage in natural talent", you realize if looking pretty and fluid was the most important thing we would have seen Drouin rather than MacKinnon go to the Avs #1.
 
sjci said:
I'd argue that they have been, but I know what you're trying to say. And as much as I loathe Crosby, he does have unreal talent. Is it any wonder that everyone since has been compared to him, or labeled as "the next Crosby."
Click to expand...

On the same level as Crosby in the NHL?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom