Connor McDavid will go down as the 2nd best player of all-time

[tinfish]

Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr are in a class all their own. Win some cups and we can talk about it. I don't think people that didn't watch those guys understand how dominant they were. Gretzky made every other player in the league look like they should be playing beer league hockey. Like if you didn't watch him, you don't know. What Mcdavid makes guys look like Gretzky made them embarrassed to even play the same sport

 

[BlueSeal]

The difference between Gretz, Orr, Mario, etc. is that McD was a victim of a franchise that had no idea what the hell they were doing at the time and did a bang-up job of getting top picks, throwing them to the wolves with very limited development and running the whole show into the ground for damn near a decade.

When the Oilers got its collective head out of the rear, everything got better and McD, at 26, is now developing into the player he should have been at 21-22 on any other roster.

It's really easy to say pure talent is everything, but for players like the ones above, their talent was developed, honed and through the hands of solid coaching and talented teammates and vets, weaponized.

The Oilers of the decade he was picked from the draft was far worse and horribly ran than most teams save Buffalo before their turnaround.

I say give him 5 years and see where he's at then. He got robbed out of quite abit of time and development and in threads like this, it haunts him and his name.

 

[TopShelfYzerman]

I was thinking more along the lines of knee injuries. Would be interesting to see if Bobby Orr could have had a long and productive career if he had today's doctor's able to help with his knees.

Then again Orr wouldnt have the time and space to produce like did in the 70s. Some 70s players had full time jobs. Far from the pinnacle of hockey like today.

 

[TopShelfYzerman]

Howe gets so underrated because he doesn't have video game numbers. Look at his lead over competition. His peak is right up there with Lemieux. Look at his 52-53 season. 49 goals, 2nd place (his linemate Lindsay) 32 and the closest non teammate at 30.

Ppl dont appreciate Howe because when they look at numbers, they forget longevity. Also they forget the game had much less games played. However, anybody that looks at the sheer numbers, Howes greatness over the next best over a 6 year span rivals that of Mario, hence why he is considered better than Mario overall.

 

[HFpapi]

Mario said himslef that Howe is the better player.

Ohh well that settles it then.

It's called having reverence and respect towards the ones that came before. Gretzky has said basically everyone is better than him including Howe.

People also need to stop think that players know more about the game than the fans in terms of like player rankings etc (not talking actual on ice x's and o's). A lot of players barely watch or follow hockey when they aren't playing and I've seen some pretty brutal opinions/lists from them.

I trust the average message board poster over the average player for making a historical ranking.

 

[Holls Blackmail]

I mean.. yes? lol

But not a complete player.

 

[Conbon]

Ppl dont appreciate Howe because when they look at numbers, they forget longevity. Also they forget the game had much less games played. However, anybody that looks at the sheer numbers, Howes greatness over the next best over a 6 year span rivals that of Mario, hence why he is considered better than Mario overall.

My point is that it is not just longevity. His peak is higher than Jagr's for sure if we are talking guys with long careers. People here talking like he's 4th out of the big four when he should be 3rd at worst with Lemieux 4th.

 

[Random Comment]

Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr are in a class all their own. Win some cups and we can talk about it. I don't think people that didn't watch those guys understand how dominant they were. Gretzky made every other player in the league look like they should be playing beer league hockey. Like if you didn't watch him, you don't know. What Mcdavid makes guys look like Gretzky made them embarrassed to even play the same sport

That had everything to do with the quality of players in the league at the time. Mcdavid is more skilled than Gretzky ever was.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

So Mario lemieux having 60 goals and 160 points in 60 games which is 92 and 213 points in 80 is me reaching blindly in saying Gretzkys 92 and 215 was in jeopardy? What do you think in 20 more games Mario was gonna score 15 points? They guy was gonna score between 210-220. Whether he hit 215 who knows but he 100 percent would have been close.

It’s because you blindly go into every thread with Crosby and Lemieux being the bestest ever and rely on what ifs to prove your shoddy point.

 

[paracord]

That had everything to do with the quality of players in the league at the time. Mcdavid is more skilled than Gretzky ever was.

McDavid has gone his entire career up until this year being the 2nd best goal scorer on HIS OWN TEAM. How in the world is he at Gretzky's level? "skilled?" You mean like winning NHL skills competitions, not actually playing NHL hockey?

McDavid is a FANTASTIC player. It's not a knock on him at all. But to say he's going to be the 2nd best player ever already is kind of silly. Lemieux and Gretzky hit peaks that frankly McDavid is not really even close to. He's already getting into his late 20s. If he hasn't hit them by now, he's not hitting them, likely.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

It’s because you blindly go into every thread with Crosby and Lemieux being the bestest ever and rely on what ifs to prove your shoddy point.

Not the poster you're responding to, but discussing "what ifs" are why this forum exists, otherwise, I could just purchase the HFBoards textbook that has all the answers.

 

[GettingYourMoms]

After who? Pastrnak?

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

Not the poster you're responding to, but discussing "what ifs" are why this forum exists, otherwise, I could just purchase the HFBoards textbook that has all the answers.

I mean if we're playing the what if game, I can extrapolate Gretzky's 205 in 74 season to a full season, pretend Gretzky's back never gets severely injured by Suter in 91, extrapolate McDavid's 105 in 56 to a full season, and pretend Manning and Giordano never injure McDavid. Lemieux and Crosby get gapped in imaginationland anyway. The arguments just aren't needed b/c they gapped them in real life with real events that happened regardless.

 

[bucks_oil]

McDavid has gone his entire career up until this year being the 2nd best goal scorer on HIS OWN TEAM. How in the world is he at Gretzky's level? "skilled?" You mean like winning NHL skills competitions, not actually playing NHL hockey?

McDavid is a FANTASTIC player. It's not a knock on him at all. But to say he's going to be the 2nd best player ever already is kind of silly. Lemieux and Gretzky hit peaks that frankly McDavid is not really even close to. He's already getting into his late 20s. If he hasn't hit them by now, he's not hitting them, likely.

I'm not sure how relevant your first point is.

Kurri scored 16 more goals than Gretzky in 85-86. That was the year Gretzky had 215 points.

What does it matter?

Anyway... this Oiler fan watched them both in their primes. As a hockey-mad pre-teen and now a mid-forties guy.

I'm not going to say "better", but to me McDavid is hands down more skilled than Gretzky was. And certainly more breath-taking-hair-standing-on-end exciting than Gretzky. Now what Gretzky's brain was able to DO and achieve with his skillset is entirely another question and why the OP correctly limits McDavid's potential to #2.

Just enjoy... you've never seen a player quite like McDavid, nobody has.

 

[RiverbottomChuck]

Rightfully so. Orr dominated both offensively and defensively. He was like Mario on offense and as good as he was on O, he was just as good on D.

As much as I like McDavid, he has to win several cups and keep playing like this for a good while longer to have a shot at passing Orr. Maybe pass 2000 points. Orr was just too remarkable at both ends to be slighted in his ranking in any way. The benchmark needs to be really really high for McDavid.

I agree, I just think there is an opportunity for him to end up being in the argument.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Not the poster you're responding to, but discussing "what ifs" are why this forum exists, otherwise, I could just purchase the HFBoards textbook that has all the answers.

I don’t think so. What ifs deal with something that doesn’t exist to automatically boost a player based on benefit of doubt. Which is something that poster does nearly every time.

For Lemieux vs Gretzky for example, Lemieux seems to get every what if his way, but Gretzky does not. It’s mostly because Gretzky already has the tangible evidence as the greatest ever, while Lemieux boosters like Nathaniel there, have to resort to pace and what ifs.

I think if someone uses what ifs, it should probably be used for all parties in comparison.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

I don’t think so. What ifs deal with something that doesn’t exist to automatically boost a player based on benefit of doubt. Which is something that poster does nearly every time.

For Lemieux vs Gretzky for example, Lemieux seems to get every what if his way, but Gretzky does not. It’s mostly because Gretzky already has the tangible evidence as the greatest ever, while Lemieux boosters like Nathaniel there, have to resort to pace and what ifs.

I think if someone uses what ifs, it should probably be used for all parties in comparison.

I agree.

 

[paracord]

I'm not sure how relevant your first point is.

Kurri scored 16 more goals than Gretzky in 85-86. That was the year Gretzky had 215 points.

What does it matter?

Anyway... this Oiler fan watched them both in their primes. As a hockey-mad pre-teen and now a mid-forties guy.

I'm not going to say "better", but to me McDavid is hands down more skilled than Gretzky was. And certainly more breath-taking-hair-standing-on-end exciting than Gretzky. Now what Gretzky's brain was able to DO and achieve with his skillset is entirely another question and why the OP correctly limits McDavid's potential to #2.

Just enjoy... you've never seen a player quite like McDavid, nobody has.

The point was that you were comparing a guy that wasn't even the best goal scorer in the league up until now, and it's close. In Lemieux and Gretzky's primes, they were the best passers and goal scorers without even a doubt, for years on end.

Oh I do enjoy. I've never said McDavid isn't a great player. But you guys also need to not get offended when someone counters your points with other logical points.

 

[3074326]

But not a complete player.

Do you say the same about Gretzky?

 

[Random Comment]

McDavid has gone his entire career up until this year being the 2nd best goal scorer on HIS OWN TEAM. How in the world is he at Gretzky's level? "skilled?" You mean like winning NHL skills competitions, not actually playing NHL hockey?

McDavid is a FANTASTIC player. It's not a knock on him at all. But to say he's going to be the 2nd best player ever already is kind of silly. Lemieux and Gretzky hit peaks that frankly McDavid is not really even close to. He's already getting into his late 20s. If he hasn't hit them by now, he's not hitting them, likely.

The quality of competition in the older era was a joke. Go watch highlights of all three - it’ll be abundantly clear who possesses the highest level of skill.

 

[GMR]

The quality of competition in the older era was a joke. Go watch highlights of all three - it’ll be abundantly clear who possesses the highest level of skill.

I doubt you've seen any Lemieux highlights, unless you were watching Claude.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

The quality of competition in the older era was a joke. Go watch highlights of all three - it’ll be abundantly clear who possesses the highest level of skill.

By this line of reasoning, the best players of all time haven't even been born yet. So why are we discussing who the best of the runners-up will be?

 

[Random Comment]

By this line of reasoning, the best players of all time haven't even been born yet. So why are we discussing who the best of the runners-up will be?

That’s the thing - there will always be better. Mcdavid is better than Gretzky and Mario. And someone will come around eventually that is better than Mcdavid.

If we are judging the players how they did relative to their competition, the book is closed. Nobody will ever be at the level Gretzky was, and a lot of that had to do with him being ahead of his time in comparison to quality of competition. Compare lines 2 through 4 in the 90s to now.

I doubt you've seen any Lemieux highlights, unless you were watching Claude.

I began watching hockey as he entered his prime, so yes I did watch. You must be in denial, unless you don’t actually watch the oilers play?

 

[goldnblack]

If he doesn't win a cup he won't be in my top 5

 

[Oleksiak]

If he doesn't win a cup he won't be in my top 5

Exactly. He needs to do what Yzerman did and start backchecking in order to help the team. The greatest players of all time all made winning their main priority; McDiver needs to do the same.