Can Connor McDavid break up the "big 4"?

[wetcoast]

Jagr is not in most people's top 10.

In the last top 100, only 6 of 32 posters had him top 10. 13 had him 11-15, 9 had him 16-20. 4 outside top 20.

30 had Beliveau top 10.
27 had Hull top 10.
26 had Harvey top 10.
23 had Richard top 10.
17 had Roy top 10.
13 had Bourque top 10.
11 had Morenz top 10
10 had Hasek top 10.
10 had Crosby top 10.
8 had Shore top 10.

So of the 6 available spots, he was 11th most common to be listed top 10.

The thing is that he stacks up very well against this group...except to SC and "playoff resume" yet he is the 5th in playoffs all time.

A thing that will work in McDavid's favour with Jagr, is that his 2022 playoff run is better than any singular Jagr run.

The singular Jagr run is where he seems to have an issue but some of that is Marcel Dionne like analysis with teams that simply not being very well constructed when he was the man.

 

[authentic]

I really wish people would internalize this more about most any statistical performance. Even larger samples like an 82 game season are subject to the randomness inherent to the sport. Sometimes a down year is just regressing to the mean (their career mean). Sometimes a player's pace is just good luck. When a player on a torrid pace gets injured, the temptation for positive narrative coherence ("it was their new normal") inevitably wins over the negative narrative coherence ("they just ran hot over a small sample"). At least nowadays you can point to the underlying statistical evidence, but it isn't like this didn't happen in the 40s, 50s and 60s. Who'd want to bet that Maurice Richard's 50 in 50 season was the highest oiSH% at even strength of his career? That takes nothing away from his accomplishment, it just shows that luck plays a far bigger role than people want to acknowledge.

The watered down league from WW2 was the biggest reason for the season he had.

Lowest on ice shooting percentage of his career at even strenght and in general was quite different than the average since scoring went up again in the nhl.

That said, he had 78 ev points in 80 games last year, 70 in 74 games this year, virtually the same, the difference is all in the much more effective power play.

McDavid, pts per 60 minutes at ev

22-23: 2.76
21-22: 2.61 (considering the 10.7% instead of his usual 14-15% shooting percentage seem like bad puck luck could explain a lot of it, if it was not some hand-wrist or something else in the kinematic chain injury damaging his shooting)
20-21: 3.57
19-20: 2.89
18-19: 2.82

Still winning Ross when things does not go well (would it be Jagr playing ljust 63 games and still winning) or puck luck, show a level of separation with the pack is going on, usually winners do it on a perfect storm kind of season, play almost all the game, power play went well, their line was firing and in general having a top 2 season if not the best season of their career, etc...

Jagr-McDavid does it on a "down" year and obviously Gretzky-Lemieux.

Wait, his points per 60 at ES was that much more dominant in the short season and we're supposed to believe that season had no effect at all in boosting his play compared to a regular 82 game season? I didn't know it was that big of an outlier in his career.

 

[MadLuke]

I didn't know it was that big of an outlier in his career.

he went over 3 in 82 games in 2017-2018 has well (3.17), I do wonder if there is some balancing that go one for the very elite between PP and EV scoring, maybe some scoring effect or just ice time distribution season by season, to average things out a little bit

 

[wetcoast]

1992 is great, and a higher level of play than 1991. But having your team beat the best defensive team in the league while you're out hurt really demonatrates the strength of those Penguins teams.

Flames were third best defensive team last year. Does anyone seriously think the Oilers beat them if McDavid doesn't play?

For the record, I don't think McDavid overtakes Lemieux. But I also didn't think he was going to put up 2 PPG in the playoffs last year or 150 points this year.

Mario was a bit of a run up the score type of player as were those Pens teams much like Greztky's Oilers and Mario relied on the PP quite a bit and had more opportunities.

In 88-89 the Pens had 491 PPO and scored 119 PPG, so far this season the Oilers have had 254 PPO and scored on 81 of them.

their lines read like this

Mario ES 76-41-61-102
Connor ES 74-36-34-70

Mario PP 31-48-79
Connor PP 21-43-64

In 88-89 both the Pens and LA put out there snipers a lot on the PK and Mario had 18 SHP, Gretzky 15, Nicholls 14, Steve Yzerman for reference had 8 SHP.

Pittsburg PK BTW was below league average 16th in a 21 team NHL.

This season the SHP leader has exactly 8 points and McDavid has 6.

In short scoring at different times in the NHL is more than just averages and talent it's about opportunities and season specific strategies and norms.

 

[wetcoast]

1992 is great, and a higher level of play than 1991. But having your team beat the best defensive team in the league while you're out hurt really demonatrates the strength of those Penguins teams.

Flames were third best defensive team last year. Does anyone seriously think the Oilers beat them if McDavid doesn't play?

For the record, I don't think McDavid overtakes Lemieux. But I also didn't think he was going to put up 2 PPG in the playoffs last year or 150 points this year.

Red Wings without Howe also won a SC as did the Habs with Beliveau playing in 3 of their 11 post season games.

I think it goes to show that at different times in NHL history some teams and the era was different enough that one of the big 4 (or with Jean having a case for 5th) teams could have success without their superstars, in a salary cap world it is much less likely.

 

[jigglysquishy]

The thing is that he stacks up very well against this group...except to SC and "playoff resume" yet he is the 5th in playoffs all time.


The singular Jagr run is where he seems to have an issue but some of that is Marcel Dionne like analysis with teams that simply not being very well constructed when he was the man.

Bourque and Hasek also did not have teams structured in their favour during their primes. Bourque repeatedly pulling teams deep into the playoffs is a mark in his favour. That Hasek took the Sabres deep in both 1998 and 1999 is strong too.

Are the 1998 or 1998 Sabres that much stronger than the 1998 or 1999 Penguins? They were virtually tied in GA in 1998.

Are the 2022 or 2023 Oilers so much deeper than the 1998 or 1999 or 2000 Penguins? McDavid basically won the Kings series by himself. Putting up 5 points on 6 Oilers goals in games 6 and 7. 3 points of 4 Oilers goals in game 5. That's 8 points on 10 goals in games 4-7.

For Jagr, he just doesn't have anything like this. It's not that he was bad, in fact he was generally good bordering on great. But when we're talking about the 5th best player in 140 years of hockey, generally good isn't placing you.

Amongst wingers, I think you could argue Jagr at #2 behind Howe. Most of us have him behind Hull. And I see why having Richard ahead is common. I wouldn't fault anyone for placing Ovechkin ahead.

It's not so much that Jagr is bad as much as it is a very stacked field.

 

[wetcoast]

Is it really fair to list Lemieux linemates here as "touchable"...?

In 92 probably not but in 96 Jagr played on a different line than Mario quite often, although the PP would have them both out there.

Like I have pointed out in other recent posts it's a lot harder to compare the 88-89 season with the 22-23 season in terms of these 2 guys scoring than it appears on the surface things have changed.

 

[wetcoast]

Bourque and Hasek also did not have teams structured in their favour during their primes. Bourque repeatedly pulling teams deep into the playoffs is a mark in his favour. That Hasek took the Sabres deep in both 1998 and 1999 is strong too.

Hasek sure but I'm not going to compare position players with goalies here plus Hasek was a freak in Buffalo, not so much in Chicago.

Bourque entered the league on a pretty good Boston team not some bottom dweller and his teams usually were pretty well constructed and competitive, the late 90s Pens simply weren't just go back and check.

Are the 1998 or 1998 Sabres that much stronger than the 1998 or 1999 Penguins? They were virtually tied in GA in 1998.

Are the 2022 or 2023 Oilers so much deeper than the 1998 or 1999 or 2000 Penguins? McDavid basically won the Kings series by himself. Putting up 5 points on 6 Oilers goals in games 6 and 7. 3 points of 4 Oilers goals in game 5. That's 8 points on 10 goals in games 4-7.

I would say that the Oilers are better constructed than those late 90s Pens teams yes.

For Jagr, he just doesn't have anything like this. It's not that he was bad, in fact he was generally good bordering on great. But when we're talking about the 5th best player in 140 years of hockey, generally good isn't placing you.

The thing is that I like to look at the whole picture and sure Jagr doesn't have that signature playoff or Conn Smythe worthy run but he also doesn't have the meh 4 year stretch that Jean Beliveau did in the early 60s on still very good Habs teams.

His playoff resume is still very good even if it's not the best among say the top 15 overall players of all time.

When you look at Jagr over a longer period of time, say a playoff prime his resume is closer to the elite than it is to the average and it's often very good in terms of production, those focusing on the alck of a signature season are right but then again some guys like Big Jean with signature seasons had lower valley than Jagr as well.

Heck even in the late 90's when the Pens weren't that well constructed Jagr was still 5th in overall playoff scoring from 98-00 and was a singificant leader is PPG

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Amongst wingers, I think you could argue Jagr at #2 behind Howe. Most of us have him behind Hull. And I see why having Richard ahead is common. I wouldn't fault anyone for placing Ovechkin ahead.

It's not so much that Jagr is bad as much as it is a very stacked field.

This is fair and often wingers do drop behind franchise centers and Dmen but at other times wingers stay way too high given their overall resume, Guy Lafleur specifically.

I would have Jagr second for wingers of all time behind Howe as well but it's not a slam dunk either.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

In 92 probably not but in 96 Jagr played on a different line than Mario quite often, although the PP would have them both out there.

Like I have pointed out in other recent posts it's a lot harder to compare the 88-89 season with the 22-23 season in terms of these 2 guys scoring than it appears on the surface things have changed.

I don't like using adjusted stats because they ignore alot of factors, but in comparing McDavid to Lemieux on adjusted stats it closes the gap considerably

Adjusted points 5 best years:

McDavid - 158, 148, 118, 116, 110
Lemieux - 165, 156, 141, 129, 127

 

[jigglysquishy]

I don't like using adjusted stats because they ignore alot of factors, but in comparing McDavid to Lemieux on adjusted stats it closes the gap considerably

Adjusted points 5 best years:

McDavid - 158, 148, 118, 116, 110
Lemieux - 165, 156, 141, 129, 127

This doesn't factor in Lemieux’s missed time

165 adjusted in 76 games, not 82.

HRef doesn't explicitly state it. But McDavid 2023 is adjusted to 82 games, while Lemieux missing time isn't counted towards him.

So the numbers are actually 165 in 76 vs 158 in 82.

So there's a bigger peak gap than HRef shows.

 

[Michael Farkas]

In 92 probably not but in 96 Jagr played on a different line than Mario quite often, although the PP would have them both out there.

Like I have pointed out in other recent posts it's a lot harder to compare the 88-89 season with the 22-23 season in terms of these 2 guys scoring than it appears on the surface things have changed.

Jagr was in on more than 50 of his points, was my point. Linemates or not.

 

[seventieslord]

Bourque entered the league on a pretty good Boston team not some bottom dweller and his teams usually were pretty well constructed and competitive, the late 90s Pens simply weren't just go back and check.

Were they? They were outscored by a 1.04:1 ratio with him not on the ice over a span of 20 years.

 

[LTIR]

so who wants to initiate the inevitable mcdavid vs mario comps?

So are we done with McDavid vs Crosby then?

Forget big 4, has McDavid cracked the top 100 list yet? We know Malkin for one reason or another didn't.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

That's right. I made several posts about this on the main board last year. McDavid had terrible "puck luck" last year, and should have finished with around 145 points. (From watching McDavid, I don't think he's actually created that many more opportunities this year compared to last year - just that he's shooting more, perhaps due to the frustration of his teammates not being to capitalize on his chances).

Of course, a player shouldn't get credit for what "should" have happened, and McDavid is "reachable" in a way that Gretzky and Lemieux weren't. But it's remarkable that even with terrible luck, McDavid was still able to take the Art Ross.

In 50 years when people are evaluating McDavid's career, I'm sure they'll wonder why he "only" scored 123 points (still the 6th highest total in the past 27 years) between two years with a pace of 150 points (per 82 games). But it was just bad luck.

I think it's pretty clear at this point that McDavid's 2021-22 season was negatively impacted by the unique circumstances of one particular stretch of games. In mid-December, the Oilers had their final 3 games before the holiday break postponed because of Covid concerns, creating an unplanned 11 day break. Then just when they returned, McDavid still contracted Covid anyway, along with a number of his teammates, and the Oilers immediately went on a 7 game losing streak. They would continue to sleepwalk through games in January and early February, leading to an internal crisis that resulted in the organization deciding to fire Dave Tippett and hire Jay Woodcroft.

McDavid through Dec 18: 49 points in 29 games (139 point pace)
McDavid Dec 19-Feb 10: 12 points in 14 games (70 point pace)
McDavid under Woodcroft: 62 points in 37 games (137 point pace)
McDavid in 2022 playoffs: 33 points in 15 games (180 point pace)

Sure, that probably falls mostly under the definition of bad luck, but I think it is best to try to be as specific as possible about these types of scenarios if we can isolate variables that we think might be impacting the results. It is also of course very possible to not care and view this negatively, calling McDavid out for not being able to adapt to a challenging situation (perhaps a preferred choice for some of the more accomplishments-focused crowd here). But if the question is whether McDavid has proven the talent level to be discussed in a Big 5 context then I think there's no doubt about that whatsoever, and the 2021-22 season certainly doesn't do anything at all to dissuade that in my view.

 

[authentic]

I think it's pretty clear at this point that McDavid's 2021-22 season was negatively impacted by the unique circumstances of one particular stretch of games. In mid-December, the Oilers had their final 3 games before the holiday break postponed because of Covid concerns, creating an unplanned 11 day break. Then just when they returned, McDavid still contracted Covid anyway, along with a number of his teammates, and the Oilers immediately went on a 7 game losing streak. They would continue to sleepwalk through games in January and early February, leading to an internal crisis that resulted in the organization deciding to fire Dave Tippett and hire Jay Woodcroft.

McDavid through Dec 18: 49 points in 29 games (139 point pace)
McDavid Dec 19-Feb 10: 12 points in 14 games (70 point pace)
McDavid under Woodcroft: 62 points in 37 games (137 point pace)
McDavid in 2022 playoffs: 33 points in 15 games (180 point pace)

Sure, that probably falls mostly under the definition of bad luck, but I think it is best to try to be as specific as possible about these types of scenarios if we can isolate variables that we think might be impacting the results. It is also of course very possible to not care and view this negatively, calling McDavid out for not being able to adapt to a challenging situation (perhaps a preferred choice for some of the more accomplishments-focused crowd here). But if the question is whether McDavid has proven the talent level to be discussed in a Big 5 context then I think there's no doubt about that whatsoever, and the 2021-22 season certainly doesn't do anything at all to dissuade that in my view.

Just a minor correction it was 33 points in 16 games, 169 point pace.

 

[wetcoast]

Were they? They were outscored by a 1.04:1 ratio with him not on the ice over a span of 20 years.

Well he was a pretty good Dman and one would expect that as he would probably play alot with the top 6 forwards and often in Boston the secondary offensive Dman wouldn't be that impactful.

I guess the main point and the original one I was responding to was that the late 90s Pens teams with Jagr weren't as well constructed as say some other guys and I would include most of the time Bourque was in Boston.

But that's a gut feeling and I do know that they were a playoff team and had 100 points the year before Bourque joined them.

While I was out I was thinking about how to best fairly compare all time a winger to a franchise Dman or center and for forwards it can be an easier task but comparing Dmen gets a little tricky as they tend to age better generally.

Jagr was in on more than 50 of his points, was my point. Linemates or not.

Fair enough but at that point Jagr wasn't that far off from Mario in terms of creating their own way and it wasn't like Kevin Stevens earlier in the decade.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

A big reason for his increase in scoring is his ability to shoot five hole consistently. No player ever scored this many five hole goals that I've ever witnessed. That and a bit of luck going his way compared to last season of course.

Agreed. What I was trying to say is I don't think McDavid is generating more chances this year compared to 2022 (in terms of frequency or quality). Just that a higher percentage of those chances are being capitalized because he's shooting more himself (primarily with those five hole goals, like you said) - rather than relying on linemates who have been poor finishers.

(But @ContrarianGoaltender's excellent post about McDavid's mini-slump last year is causing me to second-guess my comment).

 

[WarriorofTime]

How many Retro Rockets did Lemieux win?

 

[jigglysquishy]

How many Retro Rockets did Lemieux win?

3.

1988,1989,1996

Also lead in GPG in

1987
1993
Technically 2001 as well

 

[WarriorofTime]

3.

1988,1989,1996

Also lead in GPG in

1987
1993
Technically 2001 as well

OK, so we add those to his "trophy case" (not his fault the award didn't exist), and I think McDavid still has some obvious room to go, but I don't think it's out of the question that he surpasses him in trophy count.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't know how to say this, but is that really a trophy...? Ugh, I don't know how to say that better...

 

[jigglysquishy]

Pure trophy case isn't the best way to rank players. Especially when one had a prime alongside Gretzky and consistently missed time.

The biggest knocks on McDavid re Lemieux are that Lemieux at his best was simply a better hockey player. We can twist it any way we want. But McDavid now isn't as good as Lemieux from 1987 Canada Cup until 1993 playoffs.

I'd also add that Howe 1951-1954 wasn't as good as Lemieux 87-93. But we pretty consistently rank him ahead.

So McDavid does have a path forward, just not an easy one.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I don't know how to say this, but is that really a trophy...? Ugh, I don't know how to say that better...

Agreed. The Rocket Richard trophy was a marketing decision to honour the player. Leading the league in goals didn't magically become more valuable in 1999 (the first year the trophy was awarded), just because that was when the Habs pushed the league to create the award before Richard passed away.

Granted, you can retroactively determine who would have won the RR each year, as it's a statistical trophy. So we can still give Brett Hull credit for three RR's. But why is there no trophy for leading the league in assists? I don't think leading the league in goals in inherently more valuable than leading the league in assists. (That's pretty clear when you look at how the leading goalscorer has ranked in Hart voting compared to the leading playmaker - that's not a perfect comparison of course, since the voters don't always make good decisions, but if leading the league in goals was more valuable than leading the league in assists, you'd expect to see some type of difference over 50+ years. The same is true if you look at which players get inducted into the HOF - same disclaimer, the voters don't always make good decisions, but if you'd expect to see some type of patter over five or six decades if there really was a meaningful difference).

I've also mentioned in a few other threads - a trophy for the player with the most goals (or most assists) rewards specialization. Bondra led the league in goals twice. Oates (towards the end of his career in Washington) led the league in assists twice. Under this framework, they'd both get two trophies. Mats Sundin and Mike Modano, who were pretty well-balanced between goals and assists, were more productive during the DPE by any reasonable measure. But Sundin and Modano never led the league in any statistical category, because they were nicely balanced between goals and assists.

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

I'd also add that Howe 1951-1954 wasn't as good as Lemieux 87-93. But we pretty consistently rank him ahead.

Uh, are we really so sure about that? Using a back-of-the-envelope version of VsX for consecutive years (9th place times 2 minus 25th place for points):

Spoiler: Howe, 1950-51 to 1953-54

Rk​	Player​	GP​	G​	A​	A1​	A2​	P​	Est. “VsX”​	P1 %​
1​	Gordie Howe​	280​	172​	176​	127​	49​	348​	156.8​	86%​
2​	Ted Lindsay​	277​	112​	149​	96​	53​	261​	117.6​	80%​
3​	Maurice Richard​	253​	134​	104​	68​	36​	238​	107.2​	85%​
4​	Red Kelly​	269​	68​	128​	83​	45​	196​	88.3​	77%​
5​	Ted Kennedy​	243​	66​	122​	81​	41​	188​	84.7​	78%​
6​	Sid Smith​	280​	99​	86​	57​	29​	185​	83.3​	84%​
7​	Milt Schmidt​	261​	68​	109​	73​	36​	177​	79.7​	80%​
8​	Elmer Lach​	236​	57​	119​	73​	46​	176​	79.3​	74%​
9​	Paul Ronty​	275​	51​	124​	89​	35​	175​	78.8​	80%​
10​	Bert Olmstead​	262​	57​	116​	73​	43​	173​	77.9​	75%​
11​	Tod Sloan​	275​	82​	90​	66​	24​	172​	77.5​	86%​
12​	Don Raleigh​	259​	53​	114​	86​	28​	167​	75.2​	83%​
13​	Cal Gardner​	276​	63​	98​	65​	33​	161​	72.5​	80%​
14​	Bernie Geoffrion​	204​	89​	72​	41​	31​	161​	72.5​	81%​
15​	Bill Mosienko​	265​	84​	76​	47​	29​	160​	72.1​	82%​
16​	Max Bentley​	229​	71​	87​	60​	27​	158​	71.2​	83%​
17​	Johnny Peirson​	255​	74​	83​	53​	30​	157​	70.7​	81%​
18​	Metro Prystai​	271​	69​	88​	48​	40​	157​	70.7​	75%​
19​	George Gee​	276​	63​	88​	64​	24​	151​	68.0​	84%​
20​	Wally Hergesheimer​	204​	83​	57​	36​	21​	140​	63.1​	85%​
21​	Fleming MacKell​	264​	57​	78​	50​	28​	135​	60.8​	79%​
22​	Ed Sandford​	247​	53​	77​	46​	31​	130​	58.6​	76%​
23​	Doug Harvey​	275​	23​	106​	51​	55​	129​	58.1​	57%​
24​	Jimmy Peters​	278​	60​	69​	34​	35​	129​	58.1​	73%​
25​	Harry Watson​	271​	77​	51​	32​	19​	128​	57.7​	85%​
​	Est “VsX” baseline (9th x 2 - 25th)​	​	​	​	​	​	222​	Avg. P1 %:​	80%​

Looking at this "multi-year VsX", Howe looks incredible, scoring 156.8. Also impressively, 86% of his points were primary (compared to the top-25 scorers' average of 80%).

It's tough to gauge Lemieux past 1988-89 due to injury, but it seems safe to say that his back-to-back seasons of 1987-88 to 1988-89 are fairly representative of his performance through that period. He basically bounced between 160+ point and ~200-point level performances from year to year (with his partial 1990-91 regular season being an exception where he was 3rd in points-per-game behind Gretzky and Oates).

Spoiler: Lemieux, 1987-88 to 1988-89

Rk​	Player​	GP​	G​	A​	A1​	A2​	P​	Est. “VsX”​	P1 %​
1​	Mario Lemieux​	153​	155​	212​	127​	85​	367​	150.4​	77%​
2​	Wayne Gretzky​	142​	94​	223​	140​	83​	317​	129.9​	74%​
3​	Steve Yzerman​	144​	115​	142​	91​	51​	257​	105.3​	80%​
4​	Bernie Nicholls​	144​	102​	126​	78​	48​	228​	93.4​	79%​
5​	Dale Hawerchuk​	155​	85​	132​	89​	43​	217​	88.9​	80%​
6​	Denis Savard​	138​	67​	146​	96​	50​	213​	87.3​	77%​
7​	Luc Robitaille​	158​	99​	110​	68​	42​	209​	85.7​	80%​
8​	Jimmy Carson​	160​	104​	103​	65​	38​	207​	84.8​	82%​
9​	Mark Messier​	149​	70​	135​	81​	54​	205​	84.0​	74%​
10​	Jari Kurri​	156​	87​	111​	64​	47​	198​	81.1​	76%​
11​	Peter Stastny​	148​	81​	115​	80​	35​	196​	80.3​	82%​
12​	Joe Mullen​	159​	91​	103​	67​	36​	194​	79.5​	81%​
13​	Hakan Loob​	159​	77​	114​	75​	39​	191​	78.3​	80%​
14​	Paul Coffey​	121​	45​	135​	88​	47​	180​	73.8​	74%​
15​	Pat LaFontaine​	154​	92​	88​	57​	31​	180​	73.8​	83%​
16​	Steve Larmer​	160​	84​	92​	52​	40​	176​	72.1​	77%​
17​	Bobby Smith​	158​	59​	117​	79​	38​	176​	72.1​	78%​
18​	Joe Nieuwendyk​	152​	102​	72​	41​	31​	174​	71.3​	82%​
19​	Dan Quinn​	149​	74​	99​	53​	46​	173​	70.9​	73%​
20​	Doug Gilmour​	144​	62​	109​	78​	31​	171​	70.1​	82%​
21​	Michel Goulet​	149​	74​	96​	62​	34​	170​	69.7​	80%​
22​	Mike Bullard​	153​	75​	93​	61​	32​	168​	68.9​	81%​
23​	Kirk Muller​	160​	68​	100​	73​	27​	168​	68.9​	84%​
24​	Mats Naslund​	155​	57​	110​	68​	42​	167​	68.4​	75%​
25​	Gerard Gallant​	149​	73​	93​	63​	30​	166​	68.0​	82%​
​	Est “VsX” baseline (9th x 2 - 25th)​	​	​	​	​	​	244​	Avg. P1%:​	79%​

Similarly to Howe, Lemieux scores a "multi-year VsX" of over 150, but missed a few games. Prorated for those few missed games, he scores 157.2 (versus Howe's 156.8). However, only 77% of Lemieux's points are primary (versus the top-25 scorers' average of 79%) compared to Howe's 86% (versus his peers' average of 80%).

Also, for fun, Gretzky from 1981-82 to 1984-85:

Spoiler: Gretzky, 1981-82 to 1984-85

Rk​	Player​	GP​	G​	A​	A1​	A2​	P​	Est. “VsX”​	P1 %​
1​	Wayne Gretzky​	314​	323​	498​	370​	128​	821​	167.6​	84%​
2​	Mike Bossy​	302​	233​	267​	180​	87​	500​	102.0​	83%​
3​	Peter Stastny​	310​	171​	311​	195​	116​	482​	98.4​	76%​
4​	Marcel Dionne​	304​	191​	251​	158​	93​	442​	90.2​	79%​
5​	Denis Savard​	312​	142​	297​	206​	91​	439​	89.6​	79%​
6​	Jari Kurri​	288​	200​	238​	136​	102​	438​	89.4​	77%​
7​	Paul Coffey​	320​	135​	297​	148​	149​	432​	88.2​	66%​
8​	Dale Hawerchuk​	319​	175​	251​	184​	67​	426​	86.9​	84%​
9​	Michel Goulet​	304​	210​	196​	135​	61​	406​	82.9​	85%​
10​	Glenn Anderson​	312​	182​	207​	134​	73​	389​	79.4​	81%​
11​	Bryan Trottier​	296​	152​	236​	135​	101​	388​	79.2​	74%​
12​	Bernie Federko​	304​	125​	261​	150​	111​	386​	78.8​	71%​
13​	Rick Middleton​	315​	177​	194​	134​	60​	371​	75.7​	84%​
14​	Brian Propp​	315​	166​	196​	116​	80​	362​	73.9​	78%​
15​	Mark Messier​	283​	158​	191​	111​	80​	349​	71.2​	77%​
16​	Mike Gartner​	313​	163​	180​	106​	74​	343​	70.0​	78%​
17​	Kent Nilsson​	265​	140​	198​	109​	89​	338​	69.0​	74%​
18​	Dennis Maruk​	302​	127​	210​	141​	69​	337​	68.8​	80%​
19​	John Tonelli​	309​	135​	196​	118​	78​	331​	67.6​	76%​
20​	Rick Vaive​	303​	192​	137​	84​	53​	329​	67.1​	84%​
21​	Barry Pederson​	259​	133​	194​	135​	59​	327​	66.7​	82%​
22​	Dave Taylor​	266​	121​	204​	120​	84​	325​	66.3​	74%​
23​	Ron Francis​	290​	103​	219​	148​	71​	322​	65.7​	78%​
24​	John Ogrodnick​	303​	166​	156​	94​	62​	322​	65.7​	81%​
25​	Gilbert Perreault​	290​	122​	200​	113​	87​	322​	65.7​	73%​
​	Est “VsX” baseline (9th x 2 - 25th)​	​	​	​	​	​	490​	Avg. P1 %:​	78%​

Gretzky has a "multi-year VsX" of 167.6. Additionally, 84% of Gretzky's points are primary (versus the top-25 scorers' average of 78%). Unsurprisingly, Gretzky has a clear edge here (since he's basically at a ~200 point pace for all 4 seasons here).

Comparing their relative fields to see whether this method makes sense (i.e. Lemieux's competition should be deeper than Gretzky's competition which should be deeper than Howe's competition):

Spoiler: Depth of competition (multi-year VsX)

Depth of competition (“VsX”)​	Howe​	Gretzky​	Lemieux​
120s​	0​	0​	1​
110s​	1​	0​	0​
100s​	1​	1​	1​
90s​	0​	2​	1​
80s​	3​	5​	7​
70s​	12​	7​	9​

It makes sense. Looking at it cumulatively, Lemieux faced 10 players with multi-year VsX of 80+, Gretzky 8, and Howe 5. (Interestingly, if we lower the bar to 70+, Howe faced more players hitting that level than Gretzky, with Howe's era having 17 rather than Gretzky's 15. Lemieux's back-to-back seasons had 19. Not the greatest look for the early-80's, or even the late-80's for that matter given the difference in league size.)

 

[WarriorofTime]

The biggest knocks on McDavid re Lemieux are that Lemieux at his best was simply a better hockey player.

Hard disagree, you can say "adjust for era, today's skates, etc." but McDavid is a much better technical player than Lemieux.

Lemieux was probably a bit better relative to his peers, but as good as Lemieux was, McDavid skates and stick-handles better and their shot is not too far off.