Can Connor McDavid break up the "big 4"?

[Professor What]

Re: Gonzo. Yeah...maybe...that argument holds in 2013 or something...but I think you're on the fringes if you fully discount Crosby as woulda-coulda-shoulda at this point.

He's played a zillion games. He immediately came back and completely trashed the league for three-quarters of it (see, I can get full season freight out of nothing too haha) - he had like a 30% lead in the scoring race when a puck ricocheted into his mouth.

He came back the next year and won the Art Ross by like 20% didn't he?

It's not like he's a mystery or a gimmick or anything...he was already punished for missing the games with the award voting. It took players a month to catch up in 2013 to just nudge him out for the Ross and the Hart, but (not to use an ad populum) everyone knows he was by far the best thing going.

Yes, he missed the games. Yes, the best ability is not getting hit the face by pucks and dirtbags. But I guess I don't get the double punishment. Sure, is 1.7 pts/gm in an era where guys were scraping their way to 1.1 or a monstrous 1.2 gonna necessarily hold? Maybe not. But 1.5, 1.4 whatever it falls to in the extra games, still laps the field. He clearly looked the part, his game clearly translates, he proved to be a balanced attacker no matter how many undrafted free agents were on his wings.

I don't know, I'm not in the business of taking down McDavid by any means...but I'm not ready to bury Crosby quite yet either.

I think McDavid is the more talented player and clearly so, but Crosby's been at it and at the very least relevant for a long time. I don't see how anyone could have McDavid ahead of Crosby overall yet. The missed games are a thing, yeah, but I agree with you that he's at least partially outlived that. I used to be a major critic of Crosby's lack of durability, but going back to 2013-14, he's played in at least 84% of the team's games in every season except 2019-20.

If you want to judge them by peak, McDavid ahead is fair, as I've already stated I believe, but if we're talking career, or we're talking about something that would be done during a project, I don't see an argument for Crosby not being ahead. I think there's been plenty of gamesmanship on both sides of this conversation.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable with all that. I think there's stuff that McDavid does and can do that Crosby wasn't doing to the same degree. Conversely, I think there's stuff that Crosby was doing that McDavid isn't doing to the same degree. So, if you like the flash and panache of McDavid over Crosby - I'm here for that. I'd support that.

But you have to be careful, because you end up in a situation where you could ...not saying you have to, but you could inadvertently put Lemieux and/or Orr over Gretzky and Howe in the process. Which people seem touchy about. And by "touchy", I mean, avoid it like the plague, generally.

We're judging a player at the height of his powers, which already creates distorted results. But there's some innuendo that I'm reading in here to prop up McDavid over Crosby, and again, do it...I'm listening. But they might accidentally make it tough on themselves in other areas...that's when I'll pounce haha

But I get it, I'm singing 97's praises right now. I don't think it comes at 87's expense. I'd hope we didn't forget how dominant he was already...but we're also seeing something special right now.

 

[WalterLundy]

Not sure how it goes but playing in that league:

1.	Connor McDavid • EDM	1.88
2.	Leon Draisaitl • EDM	1.50
3.	Artemi Panarin • NYR	1.38
4.	Nathan MacKinnon • COL	1.35
5.	Brad Marchand • BOS	1.30
6.	Auston Matthews • TOR	1.27
	Mikko Rantanen • COL	1.27
8.	Mitch Marner • TOR	1.22
9.	Patrick Kane • CHI	1.18
10.	Aleksander Barkov • FLA	1.16

vs

1.	Sidney Crosby • PIT	1.61
2.	Daniel Sedin* • VAN	1.27
3.	Martin St. Louis* • TBL	1.21
4.	Corey Perry • ANA	1.20
5.	Henrik Sedin* • VAN	1.15
6.	Ryan Getzlaf • ANA	1.13
7.	Steven Stamkos • TBL	1.11
8.	Teemu Selänne* • ANA	1.10
9.	Alex Ovechkin • WSH	1.08
10.	Brad Richards • DAL	1.07

That one, is less than a 2% drop ?

Top 20 ppg hoes from 0.92 to 1.02, more than a 10% jump, the average team went from 2.732 to 2.893 a 6% jump or 5.6% drop, how does this adjustment work ?

In 22-23 the average team scored 258 goals in 07 it was 236, 102 pts to make the top 10 in 23, it was 95 pts to make the top 10 in 07, how does the adjustment adds more points for having played your season in 2023 ? The way powerplay was so much higher or some maths ?

2010-11: EVG: 2.01, PPG: 0.64, SHG: 0.08
2020-21: EVG: 2.25, PPG: 0.57, SHG: 0.07

McDavid had 68 even strength points in 2021 and 37 on the powerplay. In 2011 levels he loses 7 even strength points but gains 5 powerplay points resulting in only losing two total. His 2021 season was truly big 4 caliber (as was 2023).

For the other two season comparison:
2022-23:
EVG: 2.39, PPG: 0.65, SHG: 0.10
2006-07:
EVG: 1.92, PPG: 0.85, SHG: 0.11

McDavid in 2023 had 75 even strength points, 71 powerplay points and 7 short handed points. In 2007 levels he loses 15 even strength points, gains 22 powerplay points and gains 1 short handed point. For a gain of 8 points overall. In 2007 (much like 2006) they gave powerplays out like candy and with McDavid having 71 powerplay points in a very low powerplay opportunity and goal environment this goes up in that 07 environment. McDavid’s 71 PPP in 2023 is actually the best power play point per game season in league history in a neutral adjusted environment so this should come as no surprise. His 21 and 23 seasons are the best we have seen since 1993 Mario in all honesty.

 

[Professor What]

Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable with all that. I think there's stuff that McDavid does and can do that Crosby wasn't doing to the same degree. Conversely, I think there's stuff that Crosby was doing that McDavid isn't doing to the same degree. So, if you like the flash and panache of McDavid over Crosby - I'm here for that. I'd support that.

But you have to be careful, because you end up in a situation where you could ...not saying you have to, but you could inadvertently put Lemieux and/or Orr over Gretzky and Howe in the process. Which people seem touchy about. And by "touchy", I mean, avoid it like the plague, generally.

We're judging a player at the height of his powers, which already creates distorted results. But there's some innuendo that I'm reading in here to prop up McDavid over Crosby, and again, do it...I'm listening. But they might accidentally make it tough on themselves in other areas...that's when I'll pounce haha

But I get it, I'm singing 97's praises right now. I don't think it comes at 87's expense. I'd hope we didn't forget how dominant he was already...but we're also seeing something special right now.

So, out of curiosity, are you someone that doesn't see an argument for Orr at #1? I can't see the argument for Lemieux at anywhere but four, but I can see strong arguments for Orr at one or three depending on how much one values peak and longevity relative to each other. I honestly find #2 to be a hard spot to sell Orr since it almost feels inconsistent.

Anyway, I think that some people feel like giving McDavid his due is to discredit Crosby (and Ovechkin), because saying that he's special is akin to saying the latter isn't. There seems to be a one or the other mentality that doesn't exist for Gretzky coming along a few years after Orr and then Lemieux a few years after that. We can acknowledge that all of those guys who were separated by just a few years/overlapped were special, but we can't seem to say the same thing about the modern stars. Crosby has worked himself into a point where I find the best comparable to be Beliveau. That's special. Ovechkin is making a real assault on Gretzky's goals record. McDavid hasn't been around as long, but he's doing things that we have to reference Gretzky, Lemieux, or Orr to top. That's special too. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm getting tired of reading the comments in this thread that seem to be trying to promote one guy by putting down the other. That's doing the sport a disservice in my opinion.

 

[DitchMarner]

I agree that McDavid's peak is higher (both regular season and playoffs). I also agree that Crosby is still ahead overall for now. If McDavid wins two more Art Rosses, wins another Hart or Lindsay or two and wins another Conn Smythe, that might be enough for me to put him ahead overall. It really depends on dominance. If not, he'll definitely be ahead by the time he's done if he doesn't suffer a serious injury and ages relatively well.

I don't think it's fair to take a 41 game sample and say, "this is as good in terms of dominance over peers as a full season." Half a season is nowhere the same as a full season. Crosby's scoring that season was amazing during a 25 game scoring streak and rather pedestrian (for League's best player standards) in the 16 games outside of that stretch. Because he got hurt, the hot streak ended up constituting the majority of his season. There were other stretches by players during those first few post Lockout seasons where they scored at absurd rates. For example, Ovechkin had 88 points in his first 52 games in 2010. If he gets hurt during the Olympics and misses the remainder of the season, maybe we're wondering if he could have put up close to 140 points in 82 games (which in that era would have been quite a bit above even McDavid's 2023 dominance). But he didn't come close. Crosby's on-ice percentages in 2011 were unusually high; they probably would have normalized somewhat over a full season. Everyone who watched him play that season saw that he was having a special season. He was great. But it still isn't close to impressive as a 150+ point full season in this century for me.

When McDavid dominated to an insane degree in 2021, some asked whether he could do so in a normal season, which wasn't totally unfair to wonder. Then he had his 2023 season.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Re: Gonzo. Yeah...maybe...that argument holds in 2013 or something...but I think you're on the fringes if you fully discount Crosby as woulda-coulda-shoulda at this point.

He's played a zillion games. He immediately came back and completely trashed the league for three-quarters of it (see, I can get full season freight out of nothing too haha) - he had like a 30% lead in the scoring race when a puck ricocheted into his mouth.

He came back the next year and won the Art Ross by like 20% didn't he?

It's not like he's a mystery or a gimmick or anything...he was already punished for missing the games with the award voting. It took players a month to catch up in 2013 to just nudge him out for the Ross and the Hart, but (not to use an ad populum) everyone knows he was by far the best thing going.

Yes, he missed the games. Yes, the best ability is not getting hit the face by pucks and dirtbags. But I guess I don't get the double punishment. Sure, is 1.7 pts/gm in an era where guys were scraping their way to 1.1 or a monstrous 1.2 gonna necessarily hold? Maybe not. But 1.5, 1.4 whatever it falls to in the extra games, still laps the field. He clearly looked the part, his game clearly translates, he proved to be a balanced attacker no matter how many undrafted free agents were on his wings.

I don't know, I'm not in the business of taking down McDavid by any means...but I'm not ready to bury Crosby quite yet either.

It’s actually much more simple than that. I’m not going to give credit to any player based on what they should have or could have done. Daver is, which is a problem. Crosbys peak is heavily inflated due to the games he played. Would he have won more? Of course…but he didn’t.

that’s fine. But the facts remain, McDavid actually accomplished more, played the games, and dominated. For many Crosby fans, that’s a hard pill to swallow…but it’s the truth.

 

[Nick Hansen]

McDavid's ahead for me. Just more impressive both visually and career-wise (thus far, Crosby's longevity is pretty crazy for sure).

I saw someone say Crosby is comparable to Ovechkin. I don't see that all. I think there is a reason we are discussing Crosby vs McDavid other than both being Canadian. No one is asking if McDavid is superior to Ovechkin, are they?

 

[Professor What]

It’s actually much more simple than that. I’m not going to give credit to any player based on what they should have or could have done. Dave’s costly is, which is a problem. Crosbys peak is heavily inflated due to the games he played. Would he have won more? Of course…but he didn’t.

that’s fine. But the facts remain, McDavid actually accomplished more, played the games, and dominated. For many Crosby fans, that’s a hard pill to swallow…but it’s the truth.

So out of curiosity, where would you rank the two of them among centers only? McDavid has just cracked the top 10 for me based on that playoff performance, but there are just guys ahead of him that lasted longer. On the flip side, I find it hard to see an argument for Crosby being ranked anywhere but #3 or #4 at the position (I have him #4).

McDavid's ahead for me. Just more impressive both visually and career-wise (thus far, Crosby longevity is pretty crazy it needs to be said).

I saw someone say Crosby is comparable to Ovechkin. I don't see that all. I think there is a reason we are discussing Crosby vs McDavid other than both being Canadian. No one is asking if McDavid is superior to Ovechkin, are they?

I think that Crosby and Ovechkin are comparable in that I find them at peak level to be roughly equal. I actually think there might have been a point in their careers where OV was ever so slightly ahead. But as they've aged, there's been separation. Crosby was always the more well-rounded guy, but that's become much more pronounced as they've aged. I think that question has been settled well enough that the question clearly becomes one of when and if McDavid passes Crosby for him to be the highest ranked of the three.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I'd currently have centres as

1. Gretzky
2. Lemieux
3. Beliveau
4. Crosby
5. McDavid
6. Morenz
7. Nighbor
8. Messier
9. Esposito
10. Mikita
11. Taylor
12. Sakic
13. Trottier
14. Clarke
15. Boucher
16. Lalonde
17. Yzerman
18. Apps
19. Richard
20. Malkin

 

[Professor What]

My top 20 while we're posting lists:

1​	Wayne Gretzky
2​	Mario Lemieux
3​	Jean Beliveau
4​	Sidney Crosby
5​	Howie Morenz
6​	Stan Mikita
7​	Frank Nighbor
8​	Mark Messier
9​	Connor McDavid
10​	Bobby Clarke
11​	Phil Esposito
12​	Joe Sakic
13​	Cyclone Taylor
14​	Bryan Trottier
15​	Steve Yzerman
16​	Newsy Lalonde
17​	Syl Apps
18​	Henri Richard
19​	Frank Boucher
20​	Ted Kennedy

 

[GreatGonzo]

So out of curiosity, where would you rank the two of them among centers only? McDavid has just cracked the top 10 for me based on that playoff performance, but there are just guys ahead of him that lasted longer. On the flip side, I find it hard to see an argument for Crosby being ranked anywhere but #3 or #4 at the position (I have him #4).


I think that Crosby and Ovechkin are comparable in that I find them at peak level to be roughly equal. I actually think there might have been a point in their careers where OV was ever so slightly ahead. But as they've aged, there's been separation. Crosby was always the more well-rounded guy, but that's become much more pronounced as they've aged. I think that question has been settled well enough that the question clearly becomes one of when and if McDavid passes Crosby for him to be the highest ranked of the three.

Crosby could be anywhere between 5-8 due to simply having a full career. McDavid is still building his case but in terms of talent, I would say he threatens for top 5.

Has Crosby passed the likes of Howe or Orr? Tanya’s the big question, but I wouldn’t put him near Lemieux or Gretzky territory. Same goes for McDavid at this point in time.

EDIT: I just realized you said at CENTER, so I apologize for that confusion.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Has Crosby passed the likes of Howe or Orr?

He is no where close to overtaking either player.

But again, Lemieux didn't overtake them either.

 

[GreatGonzo]

He is no where close to overtaking either player.

But again, Lemieux didn't overtake them either.

I mean the poster I quoted has him 4th so he clearly has him head of one of those players. Certainly not over Lemieux or Gretzky.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I mean the poster I quoted has him 4th so he clearly has him head of one of those players. Certainly not over Lemieux or Gretzky.

The poster you quoted was referring specifically to centres. The debate on 3rd/4th centres around Crosby/Beliveau

 

[Professor What]

I mean the poster I quoted has him 4th so he clearly has him head of one of those players. Certainly not over Lemieux or Gretzky.

No, I didn't say that I have him fourth overall. I said I have him fourth among centers. And I asked where you rank the two of them at that position only.

 

[GreatGonzo]

No, I didn't say that I have him fourth overall. I said I have him fourth among centers. And I asked where you rank the two of them at that position only.

I apologize I misread your original post.

 

[MadLuke]

I also agree that Crosby is still ahead overall for now. If McDavid wins two more Art Rosses, wins another Hart or Lindsay or two and wins another Conn Smythe, that might be enough for me to put him ahead overall.

McDavid would have 7, more than Howe-Lemieux, he would more Hart than Lemieux, those are quite high bar.

 

[GreatGonzo]

My top 20 while we're posting lists:

1​	Wayne Gretzky
2​	Mario Lemieux
3​	Jean Beliveau
4​	Sidney Crosby
5​	Howie Morenz
6​	Stan Mikita
7​	Frank Nighbor
8​	Mark Messier
9​	Connor McDavid
10​	Bobby Clarke
11​	Phil Esposito
12​	Joe Sakic
13​	Cyclone Taylor
14​	Bryan Trottier
15​	Steve Yzerman
16​	Newsy Lalonde
17​	Syl Apps
18​	Henri Richard
19​	Frank Boucher
20​	Ted Kennedy

I honestly don’t see the argument for Messier>McDavid outside of “leadership” and nostalgia.

 

[Professor What]

I apologize I misread your original post.

So you have Gretzky, Lemieux, and who else ahead?, with Crosby 4th? I mean I see the argument. Do you think McDavid sits 5th?

It happens. I was just trying to make sure we were on the same page.

I've got Beliveau in third. I posted my top 20 centers above, and I've got McDavid 9th at the moment. That's not because I find him ninth in talent though. He just doesn't have the longevity yet. But honestly, the fact that I've got him as high as I do is that he is so immensely talented. I suspect that after next season I'll have him passing Messier and Nighbor.

"Leadership" and nostalgia aren't my reasons for putting Messier ahead. If I'm honest, I don't really like Messier. I find leadership to be an overblown quality (hence my putting it in quotes like you did), and I find Mess's leadership to be overblown at that. Messier had elite longevity. He wasn't as high of a peak, but, again, I suspect that McDavid will pass him in my rankings next season.

Edit: Btw, for me, the race to third at center is the same as the race to fifth overall. I've got Beliveau in that position right now.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It happens. I was just trying to make sure we were on the same page.

I've got Beliveau in third. I posted my top 20 centers above, and I've got McDavid 9th at the moment. That's not because I find him ninth in talent though. He just doesn't have the longevity yet. But honestly, the fact that I've got him as high as I do is that he is so immensely talented. I suspect that after next season I'll have him passing Messier and Nighbor.

"Leadership" and nostalgia aren't my reasons for putting Messier ahead. If I'm honest, I don't really like Messier. I find leadership to be an overblown quality (hence my putting it in quotes like you did), and I find Mess's leadership to be overblown at that. Messier had elite longevity. He wasn't as high of a peak, but, again, I suspect that McDavid will pass him in my rankings next season.

I actually agree. I find Messier to be quite overrated in terms of not just skill but where he he placed all time. People love him for the Lore more than the man he was, which was a dirty POS who got to get away with it because he was protected by the league and various tough guys.

I would have McDavid no lower than 7th right now personally but I see the argument for him threatening the 4-5 spot. I guess time will tell.

 

[Professor What]

I actually agree. I find Messier to be quite overrated in terms of not just skill but where he he placed all time. People love him for the Lore more than the man he was, which was a dirty POS who got to get away with it because he was protected by the league and various tough guys.

I would have McDavid no lower than 7th right now personally but I see the argument for him threatening the 4-5 spot. I guess time will tell.

Yeah, I think the margin between 7-10 is razor thin. I'm not going to throw stones at somebody that has McDavid higher up the list. I have some disagreements with @jigglysquishy's list, but I respect him as a poster and I have no doubt that there's been real thought put into that list. There is room for disagreements.

As for where McDavid ends up, I suspect he ends up in third on the centers list and fifth on the all-time list.

 

[jigglysquishy]

There's lots of variation in lists. It gets lost during a project, but the diversity in thought is what creates the discussion.

There will be some picks that would be hard to defend. Lemieux at 3 or 4. Beliveau out of the top 5. Morenz behind Mikita or Esposito.

But there's also lots of "normal" variance. You can put Yzerman, Sakic, and Trottier in any order without anyone thinking twice. You could have Crosby or Beliveau at 3.

I think McDavid has done enough at his peak. It's now 8 strong prime seasons and 3 strong playoffs. But I totally get the longevity side.

 

[Professor What]

There's lots of variation in lists. It gets lost during a project, but the diversity in thought is what creates the discussion.

There will be some picks that would be hard to defend. Lemieux at 3 or 4. Beliveau out of the top 5. Morenz behind Mikita or Esposito.

But there's also lots of "normal" variance. You can put Yzerman, Sakic, and Trottier in any order without anyone thinking twice. You could have Crosby or Beliveau at 3.

I think McDavid has done enough at his peak. It's now 8 strong prime seasons and 3 strong playoffs. But I totally get the longevity side.

I want to add one more thing to the list of asterisks too. I readily admit that I struggle to rank active players. It gets easier with someone like Crosby or Ovechkin. In all likelihood, they're close to the ends of their careers, and we've got a pretty good idea what those careers are. Someone that's only 9 years in and not yet showing signs of slowing down lacks that context. I think again about @Hockey Outsider's comment about catching a falling knife (though I believe he recently credited someone else with it). If you think you've got it pinned down, he's still cutting through the layers.

 

[VanIslander]

McDavid is greater than Messier and Crosby?

... in the same zip code... but... not yet solidified... k...?

 

[The Panther]

I don't think anyone ought to be too hung up on the power play points thing. Almost every single superstar since the internet started has been criticized for having too many PP points.

Agree, and having a lot of power play points is certainly never a bad thing. That said, I think the "criticism" (such as it is) stems from the somewhat outdated concept that power-plays dry up in the playoffs and/or when the most meaningful games are played. That was kind of true back in the Gretzky-Lemieux era (I don't know about prior), but it isn't true now. (Didn't somebody recently study it, and in 2022 or 2023 the numbers of PP's per game was actually higher in the playoffs than the regular season?)

Back in the Gretzky-Lemieux eras (and before Gretzky, too) there were more of the blow-out type games, or the 1975 Montreal vs. Washington-type of game where one club completely outclassed the other to the tune of 11-1 or something.

At the end of the day, it comes down to helping your team win. Today, if you score more PP points, it's probably helping your team win.

I can remember 2007 and Crosby had 120 points as a 19 year old. At that time I don't remember anyone caring that he scored 61 on the power play and 59 even strength. This was a rare time Crosby did this, in fact his only time. Other than that he always had much more production at even strength. And yet in 2007 everyone thought he was the best player in the game, and he was.

Yeah, that 2006-07 season does stand out for Crosby in that really huge number of PP points, or at least by percentage. But, it's like... so what? By now, we're well into the era of parity. The PP scoring is important.

There's also this:
EV points per game, 2006-07 to 2016-17
0.845 -- Crosby
0.717 -- Malkin
0.683 -- Ovechkin

Ditto Mario in, say, 1996. 79 PP points, 73 ES points, 9 SH points. Or Mario in 1988 with 80 PP, 74 ES, 14 SH. I am still taking Gretzky over him in 1988 as are most everyone, but these are really the only two seasons where this happened for Mario other than his final year in 2006. He was the best player in hockey in 1996, to me that was clear. And outside of Gretzky he was the best in 1988.

Agree with all points. I do think, back in that era, that ES point-scoring was more valuable a skill than PP points because (at least I think) the PP numbers went down in the playoffs. That's why (and again, I agree) 1987-88 Gretzky is still clearly above Mario -- Wayne out-pointed Mario 91 to 74 while playing 13 fewer games!

But yet McDavid has never reached Mario's peak level of play. He's been similar in the postseason but he's never matched Mario over a full season.

I sort-of disagree with this. I would still rank Mario over McDavid, and Mario is safe for now. That may change assuming Connor continues in good health and puts up more amazing seasons -- but Lemieux at his best was still the superior offensive player. (In as much as I "rank" players, I tend to prioritize prime abiliy over everything else, and I basically don't care about longevity at all.)

That being said, I think McDavid has basically matched Mario's peak level of play exactly twice -- in 2021 and in 2022-23. Those are easily McDavid's two best seasons, and it's only two seasons (so far). I would view those two seasons as up with Mario's best, more or less.