Connor McDavid: 150 Points Watch (32GP: 53 Points - 135.8 Pace (1.66 PPG))

[CycloneSweep]

Trade him to Montreal. Pick any 5 players/draft picks you want. We'll take care of him.

At the end of the season
Montreals 1st this year
Price at 50%
Caufield
Guhle
Suzuki

 

[nowhereman]

I am not disagreeing with you, Jagr would however beat Crosby, Ovechkin and the rest for the Ross in a majority of his healthy, prime, seasons. Where that leaves McDavid in relation to all of them? I don't know but I am certain that he is in that group of player and not in a tier above in terms of offence and in terms of career he got a lot of ground to make up.

A healthy prime Crosby, who was plagued by career-threatening injuries (which robbed him of at least 2-3 more Art Ross trophies), would most certainly be able to keep pace and/or outscore Jagr. He'd also backcheck too.

 

[Garbageyuk]

with game missed today McDavid is on 130 points pace, never mind Great One, is he going to match Great Kuch 128 points?

Nope.

 

[psycat]

No, he wouldn’t, and the stats clearly show that McDavid and Crosby scored just as high, actually slightly higher when you adjust for eras, in their peaks. Jagr would be there with OV, Malkin, and Drai, where when he is at his absolute best he might match a peak Crosby or McDavid on a low end year.

Crosby and McDavid are just so much more consistently at the top of the league in scoring, and neither had multiple seasons in their prime where they weren’t top 5 players in the game, like Jagr and OV had. Can you imagine if Crosby fell off his game at 28, then wasn’t even a top player at 29 and 30? People would lose it because he is just held to a higher standard. At 29 years old, Jagr is debatably no longer a top 5 player. 30 years old, Jagr finished 17th in PPG. At 31, he finished 22nd. At 32, Crosby finished 2nd in hart voting and tied for 5th in points, and people say he has fallen off these past few seasons. That’s the difference between a Crosby/McDavid, and an Ovechkin/Jagr

Don't care for adjusted stats, sure context is needed but Jagr was simply better offensively: raw numbers, eye-test etc supports this. Crosby peaked lower than all players mentioned except maybe Drai, of course that's not playoffs etc included but regular season offensive peak. You can only adjust and pro-rate so much before stuff get lost.

One can't compile ahead of vastly superior peak play in my book, not to mention the fact that Crosby likely never will pass Jagr in all time points- infact he won't come close. So Jagr had a way better peak and was a way better compiler compared to Crosby, these are facts. Now Sid might have playoff edge, however it's overstated of course due to fraud Smythe, on Jagr but that's about it. Other than being Canadian of course.

The difference between a Ovechkin and a Crosby is that one is a run of the mill superstar center and the other arguably the greatest goalscorer of all time, the difference between anybody mentioned(except his team mate) and McDavid is playoff success. The difference between Jagr and Ovechkin is not large, the first is the greatest non canadian forward of all time, the second is well the second. Both should by all logic reasoning be ranked above glorified Mikita and playoff no show partial season peakers in Crosby and McDavid.

In twenty, thirty years history will correct this bias and Crosby will be firmly placed in the c-tier of all time greats, where he very much belongs mind you, when people realize there is a Canadian center of his caliber in the league at any given time, more or less. McDavid? Way early to tell.

Before you come with some lazy, good for wiping your ass with, "adjusted, advanced statistics" I can end this discussion by saying needing to show proof of why Jagr was better than Crosby ever was is like needing to show proof of why a prime Jessica Alba looked better than Rosie O'Donnell, some things just are. Either you must be a mega homer, into some really weird kinks or maybe just an advanced, adjusted, extrapolated, claude giroux adjusted stat watcher who didn't see both players over their careers.

 

[Beljavskij]

Don't care for adjusted stats, sure context is needed but Jagr was simply better offensively: raw numbers, eye-test etc supports this. Crosby peaked lower than all players mentioned except maybe Drai, of course that's not playoffs etc included but regular season offensive peak. You can only adjust and pro-rate so much before stuff get lost.

One can't compile ahead of vastly superior peak play in my book, not to mention the fact that Crosby likely never will pass Jagr in all time points- infact he won't come close. So Jagr had a way better peak and was a way better compiler compared to Crosby, these are facts. Now Sid might have playoff edge, however it's overstated of course due to fraud Smythe, on Jagr but that's about it. Other than being Canadian of course, but by all means keep convincing yourself that in the right light Rosie might be just as good looking.

The difference between a Ovechkin and a Crosby is that one is a run of the mill superstar center and the other arguably the greatest goalscorer of all time, the difference between anybody mentioned(except his team mate) and McDavid is playoff success. The difference between Jagr and Ovechkin is not large, the first is the greatest non canadian forward of all time, the second is well the second. Both should by all logic reasoning be ranked above glorified Mikita and playoff no show partial season peakers in Crosby and McDavid.

In twenty, thirty years history will correct this bias and Crosby will be firmly placed in the c-tier of all time greats, where he very much belongs mind you, when people realize there is a Canadian center of his caliber in the league at any given time, more or less. McDavid? Way early to tell.

Before you come with some lazy, good for wiping your ass with, "adjusted, advanced statistics" I can end this discussion by saying needing to show proof of why Jagr was better than Crosby ever was is like needing to show proof of why a prime Jessica Alba looked better than Rosie O'Donnell. It's simply nothing that needs to be adressed. Either you must be a mega homer, into some really weird kinks or maybe just an advanced, adjusted, extrapolated, claude giroux adjusted stat watcher who didn't see both players over their careers.

The thing about Jagr that a lot of people seem to miss (by the way, I love Jags) -- is that he benefitted enormously by playing next to maybe the most talented offensive player ever for the first half of his career. Jagr, outside of the Penguins-years and one or two NYC years isn't that impressive.

He was never really a stud in the playoffs without Lemieux.

Jagr was great offensively during his 10 first years, but he was also a liability on defence and kind of lackluster when playoffs tightened up the game. From his Washington-stint and onwards, it was mostly just compiling. It seems like major revision to me to suggest that Jagr was a better player than Crosby. Peaking higher offensively sure, but better player all-round. No way.

"Crosby will be firmly placed in the c-tier of all time greats" -- So where would this be on an all time rakning?

 

[psycat]

The thing about Jagr that a lot of people seem to miss (by the way, I love Jags) -- is that he benefitted enormously by playing next to maybe the most talented offensive player ever for the first half of his career. Jagr, outside of the Penguins-years and one or two NYC years isn't that impressive.

He was never really a stud in the playoffs without Lemieux.

Jagr was great offensively during his 10 first years, but he was also a liability on defence and kind of lackluster when playoffs tightened up the game. From his Washington-stint and onwards, it was mostly just compiling. It seems like major revision to me to suggest that Jagr was a better player than Crosby. Peaking higher offensively sure, but better player all-round. No way. +/- is a flawed stat but Jagr was +30 over his career. Crosby is +193.

"Crosby will be firmly placed in the c-tier of all time greats" -- So where would this be on an all time rakning?

Won't adress rest of your post since I think I made myself clear where I stand but between just outside top 10 and around 20 maybe?

For sure behind:
Gretz, Mario, Orr, Howe, Bourque, Hasek, Jagr, Hull, Ovechkin, LaFleur, Beliveau. Is he ahead of someone like Lidström, Shore, Messier, McDavid, Richard, Trottier etc? Not so sure.

S- Tier: #99
A- Tier: Obvious 3
B-Tier: Jagr, Hasek, Hull, Beliveau, Bourque, Roy maybe.
C-Tier: 10 odd players.

Something like that.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Jagr was simply better offensively: raw numbers, eye-test etc supports this. Crosby peaked lower than all players mentioned except maybe Drai

So just extremely flawed raw numbers and your own (clearly biased) ‘eye test’ aka opinion is what you're responding back with as proof? Why am I engaging logically with someone who is so clearly pushing an agenda?

Love how you bring up raw numbers as your favorite stat to support Jagr, then go on to say Crosby peaked the lowest when he has the highest scoring season out of the rest. I’ll step aside and see if anybody else is buying what you’re selling.

 

[Beljavskij]

Won't adress rest of your post since I think I made myself clear where I stand but between just outside top 10 and around 20 maybe?

For sure behind:
Gretz, Mario, Orr, Howe, Bourque, Hasek, Jagr, Hull, Ovechkin, LaFleur, Beliveau. Is he ahead of someone like Lidström, Shore, Messier, McDavid, Richard, Trottier etc? Not so sure.

S- Tier: #99
A- Tier: Obvious 3
B-Tier: Jagr, Hasek, Hull, Beliveau, Bourque
C-Tier: 10 odd players.

Something like that.

So, you mentioned 11 guys ahead, and you can with good conscious name 9 other players ahead of Crosby? Really?

For example what puts Beliveau in front of Crosby in your perspective? I honestly want to know.

 

[psycat]

So, you mentioned 11 guys ahead, and you can with good conscious name 9 other players ahead of Crosby? Really?

For example what puts Beliveau in front of Crosby in your perspective? I honestly want to know.

Maybe? I said I can see him just outside of top 10 I just don't see a way to logically deduct who was worth more between, say, Lidström and Crosby who are both all time greats, playing different positions, both lack otherworldly peaks and played on winning teams. And people here would have you believe Harvey was superior to Lidström so then someone like that would surely be in the discussion against Crosby(even if Lidström ain't in your eyes for some reason).

He is in a rather large group of all time greats that you could realistically rank in any order depending on what you value(far removed from the big 3 and the great one, and clearly behind a handful others Jagr, Hasek, Bourque, Ovechkin and Hull 100% included.)

Beliveau vs Crosby is mostly down to superior goal scoring and the fact that the former is simply a more historically important player, similiar caliber of players of course so I don't care if someone really want's to rank Crosby above him.

Then you have a lot of people who rank Roy ahead of Hasek so he is surely there aswell, and LaFleur, Rocket, soon to be McDavid etc. I am sure you could make a case for Potvin, Mikita, Messier(I hate him fwiw) and so on over Crosby, heck Esposito is up there aswell and what about Shore? They can't all be top 10 players.

 

[psycat]

So just extremely flawed raw numbers and your own (clearly biased) ‘eye test’ aka opinion is what you're responding back with as proof? Why am I engaging logically with someone who is so clearly pushing an agenda?

Love how you bring up raw numbers as your favorite stat to support Jagr, then go on to say Crosby peaked the lowest when he has the highest scoring season out of the rest. I’ll step aside and see if anybody else is buying what you’re selling.

So now actual real stuff that happened, ie points, are flawed but some made up numbers are not flawed, the mental gymnastics keeps going. I don't need eye test(but it's surely worth something) he got better raw point finishes, better career numbers, better mulett, looked better doing it, more iconic name, wasn't a bag of flour etc.

You can keep convincing yourself that in the right light Rosie O'Donnell looks just as good if not better than Jessica Alba if you just put enough makeup on her and focus on a certain angle it doesn't make it true though.

 

[nowhereman]

Won't adress rest of your post since I think I made myself clear where I stand but between just outside top 10 and around 20 maybe?

For sure behind:
Gretz, Mario, Orr, Howe, Bourque, Hasek, Jagr, Hull, Ovechkin, LaFleur, Beliveau. Is he ahead of someone like Lidström, Shore, Messier, McDavid, Richard, Trottier etc? Not so sure.

S- Tier: #99
A- Tier: Obvious 3
B-Tier: Jagr, Hasek, Hull, Beliveau, Bourque, Roy maybe.
C-Tier: 10 odd players.

Something like that.

Its pretty obvious you have some sort of personal vendetta against Crosby, as there's just no way to logically explain your view on the guy. The fact that you're "not sure" if "run of the mill" Sid ranks ahead of Trottier or Messier is pretty telling and trying to make some sort of ridiculous, strangely misogynistic comparison to Rosie O' f***ing Donnell is the real cherry on top.

 

[Miro4Norris]

Even in this "down year" he's on pace to very possibly top Kucherov's 128 point season - which would be the highest total in about 30 years. Give me a break, it's a bit lame everyone coming in here to make fun of him lol.

McDavid always finishes seasons very strongly - he's not done yet. Still a very very real possibility he will top 130 this year

Down year? It's his best season ever ignoring the joke division half season. Ofc he plays most against weakest division again but at least he have some games against elite east as well

 

[FLAMESFAN]

1 assist only in his last 4 games.....he must really be concentrating on his defensive game hey?

 

[shtorm2005]

135.8 is still very impressive, but real question is, can he really do 0.8 of a point.

 

[keglu]

135.8 is still very impressive, but real question is, can he really do 0.8 of a point.

It's not updated, his current pace is 1.51PPG (124p points)

 

[Slimmy]

Maybe? I said I can see him just outside of top 10 I just don't see a way to logically deduct who was worth more between, say, Lidström and Crosby who are both all time greats, playing different positions, both lack otherworldly peaks and played on winning teams. And people here would have you believe Harvey was superior to Lidström so then someone like that would surely be in the discussion against Crosby(even if Lidström ain't in your eyes for some reason).

He is in a rather large group of all time greats that you could realistically rank in any order depending on what you value(far removed from the big 3 and the great one, and clearly behind a handful others Jagr, Hasek, Bourque, Ovechkin and Hull 100% included.)

Beliveau vs Crosby is mostly down to superior goal scoring and the fact that the former is simply a more historically important player, similiar caliber of players of course so I don't care if someone really want's to rank Crosby above him.

Then you have a lot of people who rank Roy ahead of Hasek so he is surely there aswell, and LaFleur, Rocket, soon to be McDavid etc. I am sure you could make a case for Potvin, Mikita, Messier(I hate him fwiw) and so on over Crosby, heck Esposito is up there aswell and what about Shore? They can't all be top 10 players.

That's cute. But we all know neither of them is Peter Forsberg. Which means they're sissies.

 

[bobholly39]

Down year? It's his best season ever ignoring the joke division half season. Ofc he plays most against weakest division again but at least he have some games against elite east as well

I agree, hence the quotation mark in down year.

It's a down year in regards to the ridiculous expectations everyone had after last season though

 

[frisco]

The thing about Jagr that a lot of people seem to miss (by the way, I love Jags) -- is that he benefitted enormously by playing next to maybe the most talented offensive player ever for the first half of his career. Jagr, outside of the Penguins-years and one or two NYC years isn't that impressive.

I mean outside of the 1079 points he put up for Pittsburgh in 809 games and the three years in New York where he led the team in scoring every year as a 33-35 year-old and won a Pearson, what is there? That's only 175% of Peter Forsberg's entire career output.

And Jagr didn't play on a line with Lemieux his first four years in Pittsburgh. A bit in 92-93 maybe, but it was mostly Stevens-Lemieux-Tocchet. In his fifth year, Jagr won the Ross when Lemieux sat out. He did play with Mario frequently in 95-96 and 96-97 but then without Mario (retired) the next three years he won the Art Ross all three of those seasons. Played half of 2000-2001 with Mario (won the Ross) to end his career in Pittsburgh.

The "next to Lemieux for the first half of his career" narrative is way off. I guess they were on the PP a lot in the instances Lemieux was actually in the lineup, but I bet Jagr took less than 15% of his ES shifts with Mario in his time with Pittsburgh.

My Best-Carey

 

[Beljavskij]

I mean outside of the 1079 points he put up for Pittsburgh in 809 games and the three years in New York where he led the team in scoring every year as a 33-35 year-old and won a Pearson, what is there? That's only 175% of Peter Forsberg's entire career output.

And Jagr didn't play on a line with Lemieux his first four years in Pittsburgh. A bit in 92-93 maybe, but it was mostly Stevens-Lemieux-Tocchet. In his fifth year, Jagr won the Ross when Lemieux sat out. He did play with Mario frequently in 95-96 and 96-97 but then without Mario (retired) the next three years he won the Art Ross all three of those seasons. Played half of 2000-2001 with Mario (won the Ross) to end his career in Pittsburgh.

The "next to Lemieux for the first half of his career" narrative is way off. I guess they were on the PP a lot in the instances Lemieux was actually in the lineup, but I bet Jagr took less than 15% of his ES shifts with Mario in his time with Pittsburgh.

My Best-Carey

But as you say. The PP time must have been significant together. And was likely the most dangerous (and effective?) PP-unit in the 90s?

 

[Beljavskij]

Maybe? I said I can see him just outside of top 10 I just don't see a way to logically deduct who was worth more between, say, Lidström and Crosby who are both all time greats, playing different positions, both lack otherworldly peaks and played on winning teams. And people here would have you believe Harvey was superior to Lidström so then someone like that would surely be in the discussion against Crosby(even if Lidström ain't in your eyes for some reason).

He is in a rather large group of all time greats that you could realistically rank in any order depending on what you value(far removed from the big 3 and the great one, and clearly behind a handful others Jagr, Hasek, Bourque, Ovechkin and Hull 100% included.)

Beliveau vs Crosby is mostly down to superior goal scoring and the fact that the former is simply a more historically important player, similiar caliber of players of course so I don't care if someone really want's to rank Crosby above him.

Then you have a lot of people who rank Roy ahead of Hasek so he is surely there aswell, and LaFleur, Rocket, soon to be McDavid etc. I am sure you could make a case for Potvin, Mikita, Messier(I hate him fwiw) and so on over Crosby, heck Esposito is up there aswell and what about Shore? They can't all be top 10 players.

I'm not really sure I see how Crosby is behind those handful others. Especially Beliveau -- who most people have top 10 (some even at nr.5). You say like Beliveau better because of his superior goal scoring -- But Crosby is about to pass him in all time goals, in fewer games played. So he has him beat in G/gp and raw totals. Crosby also has him beat in PO points (but about 10 goals less). Crosby has more top-3 art ross finishes and top 3 hart finishes.

They would have the same amount of rockets (had the award existed during all of Beliveaus career). Probably the same amount of Conn smythes (Crosby has him 2-1 now, but it didn't exist for all of Beliveaus career). So, honestly the case for Crosby is a little bit stronger -- yet you still have Beliveau in your B-tier of players, and Crosby in the C-tier. Makes no sense.

Again, the case for Crosby at 5th all time is just as compelling (if not more) as any of the ones you rank ahead.

 

[sr edler]

McDavid is currently sitting two points in front of Kadri, but Kadri plays Montreal tonight.

 

[Montreal Shadow]

Both him and Draisaitl have 3pts and are -4 over their last 5 games. Bad slump but 150pts is definitely out of reach. Might not even score 120.

 

[Thenameless]

At the end of the season
Montreals 1st this year
Price at 50%
Caufield
Guhle
Suzuki

Yes, without thinking. We haven't had a skater as good as McDavid since I was a kid - and I'm getting up there in age now. If he were able to maintain anywhere near his level of play for the next few years, he would become a hero in Montreal.

 

[psycat]

That's cute. But we all know neither of them is Peter Forsberg. Which means they're sissies.

Forsberg would have been in the Crosby tier if he had a full career, which again is not a point in Crosbys favor, simply to many players that matched his peak.

 

[K Fleur]

“Peak Peter Forsberg was a better dunker than Michael Jordan”- Somebody on HF…prolly