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

[Midnight Judges]

Off topic, but I did a deep dive into this a few years ago: link

Forsberg was, rather surprisingly, underwhelming in playoff elimination games. To quote myself:

That stat is generally going to be a pretty small sample size though, right?

 

[Sentinel]

A few points I wanted to touch on here.

1. It’s interesting how people ignore the goals tie breaker in the points race when it comes to this tidbit about Howe being top 5 in points for 20 seasons in a row. Same points and games played for Howe and Henri Richard, but Richard potted 30 goals to 28 for Howe. Splitting hairs perhaps and no less impressive that Howe was top 5 for 10 years in a row, then technically 6th, then top 5 for another 9 years in a row, but no one ever talks about that distinction.

2. Howe played half of the first game of his team’s first Cup winning run. Again, no one ever brings this up when boasting about his four Cups. He also had an underwhelming Crosby-esque 1 goal and 2 assists in a 7 game win over Montreal in 1954, where he was 5th on his team in scoring. Mario missed 6 games during the 1992 win, I bring it up all the time, but he indisputably has two signature Cup winning runs versus one for Howe (1955), who actually has more rings to his name.

3. Two rounds and only 8 wins needed versus four rounds and 16 wins. All Detroit had to do in Howe’s day was beat mediocre Toronto (all four times they won the Cup) and they were headed to the Finals.

4. The obvious one. Gordie Howe wouldn’t be winning as many Harts and Art Rosses with Gretzky overlapping his career. You’re dinging Lemieux because he finished runner up in the Hart race to Gretzky twice and that doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

File all of this under "splitting hairs."

The only point that warrants addressing is 4. Had Howe played in Gretzky's time, I am pretty sure more than a handful of voters would vote for a two-way beast over Gretzky. Especially if Howe repeats his 1952-53 season when his points were 30% greater than the next non-teammate.

So you *think* that every player from the 02 wings careers were elevated because of that cup win. Disagree and moving on.

Precisely. From Robitaille on.

 

[HFpapi]

Lemieux did things that people will be talking about forever.

McDavid is well on his way to surpassing Lemieux's career, though, if for no other reason than he'll play more games and have more opportunities to build his resume.

And the thing is, McDavid's peak is right there with Lemieux's anyways.

I know a lot of people on these boards hate adjusted stats but what else can you do? You can't compare raw totals to the 80's.

Lemieux two best seasons adjusted:

89/89: 165 points
95/96: 156 points

McDavid two best seasons adjusted:

20/21: 158 points
22/23: 146 points

 

[BraveCanadian]

And the thing is, McDavid's peak is right there with Lemieux's anyways.

I know a lot of people on these boards hate adjusted stats but what else can you do? You can't compare raw totals to the 80's.

Lemieux two best seasons adjusted:

89/89: 165 points
95/96: 156 points

McDavid two best seasons adjusted:

20/21: 158 points
22/23: 146 points

Further demonstrating how bad adjusted stats are... although in this case both of them do have heavily powerplay influenced seasons in the books.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

That stat is generally going to be a pretty small sample size though, right?

Yes, agreed, that's the limitation - it's a small sample size (which I talked about in the original post, but not the specific parts I quoted here).

 

[Richard]

And the thing is, McDavid's peak is right there with Lemieux's anyways.

I know a lot of people on these boards hate adjusted stats but what else can you do? You can't compare raw totals to the 80's.

Lemieux two best seasons adjusted:

89/89: 165 points
95/96: 156 points

McDavid two best seasons adjusted:

20/21: 158 points
22/23: 146 points

Mario was the most physically dominant player in NHL history. With the league as it is now, 22 year old Mario would score over 200 points. No clutching, grabbing, hooking, holding, punching, cheap shotting ??? No two line pass? wow.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Mario was the most physically dominant player in NHL history. With the league as it is now, 22 year old Mario would score over 200 points. No clutching, grabbing, hooking, holding, punching, cheap shotting ??? No two line pass? wow.

Uhhhh......

 

[Midnight Judges]

Uhhhh......

yeah I don't know what he's watching. When I watch games, 1 blatant interference is allowed on pretty much every dump in.

 

[Video Nasty]

File all of this under "splitting hairs."

The only point that warrants addressing is 4. Had Howe played in Gretzky's time, I am pretty sure more than a handful of voters would vote for a two-way beast over Gretzky. Especially if Howe repeats his 1952-53 season when his points were 30% greater than the next non-teammate.


Precisely. From Robitaille on.

If musing about the credit Howe gets for winning the amount of Cups he did in a 6 team league while his very first one was where he played a mere half game, yes, I can see why you’d want to wash your hands at engaging any further.

 

[WalterLundy]

Mario was the most physically dominant player in NHL history. With the league as it is now, 22 year old Mario would score over 200 points. No clutching, grabbing, hooking, holding, punching, cheap shotting ??? No two line pass? wow.

Mario Lemieux would not put up over 200 points today. He didn’t even do that in a significantly higher scoring era in real life and he’s my favorite player. Gretzky (the player I appreciate the most for many reasons) is the only player I’ve ever seen that is better than Mario and even he wouldn’t score 200 points today. Nobody in the history of the league could clear what McDavid did last year by 50 points. I get it because I got to see how great he was live and often but I truly believe we are fooling ourselves if we think 200 today is even in the realm of possibility for anyone.



The live puck era (1980-1993) had a Goals per game average of 3.74. Putting up 200 points right now would be worth 238 points in the live puck era range. Nobody ever even sniffed that back then in actuality. You’d have to believe that they’d be far better now in a harder league. Lemieux’s best season (1989 is better than 1993 in my opinion) adjusted to this year is actually worth 167 points. Gretzky’s best adjusted pace for this season is 196 in 82 games (171 in 57 GP in 1984) and Lemieux’s is 187 in 82 (169 in 62 GP in 1989). Not even possible with unsustainable paces.



This is without factoring in just how much better the game is now. These numbers are just telling you what a season is worth in a different environment not if it’s actually possible. Prior to McDavid the best season since 1996 was 128. That needs to be kept in perspective. A peak Lemieux would land between 150-170 today and Gretzky 160-180 in my estimation if they were born in the late 90s. Anything more than that is pushing it in my opinion.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Mario was the most physically dominant player in NHL history. With the league as it is now, 22 year old Mario would score over 200 points. No clutching, grabbing, hooking, holding, punching, cheap shotting ??? No two line pass? wow.

When Mario scored 199 points in 76 games (1988-89) the league averaged 3.74 goals per game.

This year we are at 3.14, approximately 19% less.

I'm just going to leave those numbers there to think about.

edit @WalterLundy nailed it. I loved Mario too but man some of these posters are romanticizing the players of their youth in this thread.

 

[UnSandvich]

Orr's peak is absurdly high, at worst 2nd highest peak of all-time behind 99 and I can totally see why so many actually rank it as the highest peak of all-time.

But Orr only played 657 total NHL games.

You don't think there's any conceivable career that McDavid can have that would overcome the peak differential considering the fact that McDavid himself is peaking exceptionally high? (McDavid I think it can be said is having the 4th highest peak of all-time behind 99, 4, 66).

If Orr has the 2nd highest peak and McDavid has the 4th highest peak, but McDavid has more than double the games played and 8 scoring titles and 6 Hart's and let's sprinkle in a Cup + Conn too, you don't think it's a question?

I know those are hypotheticals but McDavid winning 2 more scorings titles + 2 more Harts isn't a stretch by any means. The cup a bit more so but I think he gets at least 1.


Shocked it took him 3 explanations to understand what was being said. (Assuming he finally gets it).

I don’t, bc Orr changed how the game of hockey was played on a fundamental level imo. If he has medical care even at the level Lemieux was getting in the 90s, instead of what he was getting during his playing days, there’s not even a debate as to whether he’s 2nd all time. It’s a debate whether he or Gretzky is #1.

 

[Draiskull]

Let the guy Crack top 100 list first before putting him in top 5.

-Evgeni

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Mario was the most physically dominant player in NHL history. With the league as it is now, 22 year old Mario would score over 200 points. No clutching, grabbing, hooking, holding, punching, cheap shotting ??? No two line pass? wow.

This is just not true but the rest is accurate

 

[blankall]

yeah I don't know what he's watching. When I watch games, 1 blatant interference is allowed on pretty much every dump in.

Did you watch games in the 90s? The biggest defensive strategy was have two giant defenders and just let them bear hug the forwards. Yes, there is interference now, but it's not thing compared to what it was. Mario would just blow by these defenders trying to "interfere" with him. He'd be happy Scott Stevens wasn't lining him up for a head shot, that Chris Pronger wasn't trying to elbow his teeth out of his mouth, or that Kasparaitis wasn't trying to hit him from behind into the boards.

 

[strattonius]

I think he's exceptional enough to get to that #2 spot all time but before that happens he has to win a couple other pieces of hardware.

 

[BraveCanadian]

This is without factoring in just how much better the game is now. These numbers are just telling you what a season is worth in a different environment not if it’s actually possible. Prior to McDavid the best season since 1996 was 128. That needs to be kept in perspective. A peak Lemieux would land between 150-170 today and Gretzky 160-180 in my estimation if they were born in the late 90s. Anything more than that is pushing it in my opinion.

My gut feeling is that you have the right ranges here for them all.

Then again, who knows? It was only a few years ago all the kids were saying that 150 points was utterly impossible because players and goaltenders were bionic superheroes now and therefore Crosby was literally the best hockey player of all time and he'd score 300 points a season in the 80s and 90s against the beerleaguers.

The reality is that Crosby, while the best player in the league during his prime, was not on the same level. Talent and scoring levels ebb and flow and rules etc. change so you never know.. I know it is hard for people who have never seen Lemieux and Gretzky at their actual bests to understand just how special they were, but now McDavid is showing that sometimes there is an "it" factor that transcends all the training and systems and stuff that people were blabbing about the past 20 years when we didn't have one of the players with "it".

 

[mobilus]

This is just not true but the rest is accurate

I think when including skill into the equation, it’s very true.

 

[Hank Plank]

Mcdavid is not as great as other players because of circumstances beyond his control? 75 points in 49 playoff games is good for 4th all time. What more do you want him to do? If he wins it with a meager point per game pace playoff run, how does that make him greater?

Only player this season in top 10 scoring without a GWG.

So why isn’t Osgood in the HoF, talked about one of the all time greats the same way Lundqvist is?

Why isnt Darren McCarty in the HoF? Kris Draper? Do young kids even know who Kris Draper is? Everyone knows who Iginla is

No they don't.

 

[WalterLundy]

My gut feeling is that you have the right ranges here for them all.

Then again, who knows? It was only a few years ago all the kids were saying that 150 points was utterly impossible because players and goaltenders were bionic superheroes now and therefore Crosby was literally the best hockey player of all time and he'd score 300 points a season in the 80s and 90s against the beerleaguers.

The reality is that Crosby, while the best player in the league during his prime, was not on the same level. Talent and scoring levels ebb and flow and rules etc. change so you never know.. I know it is hard for people who have never seen Lemieux and Gretzky at their actual bests to understand just how special they were, but now McDavid is showing that sometimes there is an "it" factor that transcends all the training and systems and stuff that people were blabbing about the past 20 years when we didn't have one of the players with "it".

Yeah you are absolutely right. There is no way to know 100% what they would put up but those ranges probably do make the most sense given everything we can gather. They both clear McDavid but the degree of which they do so is what we can speculate.

That next point is really true. My kids grew up with Sid and Geno and were blown away by them. I’ll never forget when my oldest son asked me about Mario and if he was better than Crosby. When I told him yes he couldn’t believe it but you can’t really blame the younger crowd who didn’t get to experience these transcendent players. They will just think the current best is on the level of the best from the previous generation when that just isn’t the case.

McDavid does certainly have “it” but we both agree again on the fact that Mario (and by extension and to an even greater extent) Gretzky had even more of “it”. There will never be another player in Pittsburgh like Mario and there will never be anyone in hockey like Gretzky in my mind. Wish I could have seen Orr because everyone I talk to who did says he had that same factor.

 

[Sentinel]

If musing about the credit Howe gets for winning the amount of Cups he did in a 6 team league while his very first one was where he played a mere half game, yes, I can see why you’d want to wash your hands at engaging any further.

Because the other three points are worthless.

As for "the six team league": Howe had his first 100 pt. season at the age of 41 when the number of teams in the league doubled. More teams -- more prey for stars to feast on.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

I find it funny that winning championships matters for every sport except for hockey and McDavid.

 

[blankall]

I find it funny that winning championships matters for every sport except for hockey and McDavid.

It matters. There's a reason that players like Sakic and Yzerman have a better legacy than players like Dionne.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

It matters. There's a reason that players like Sakic and Yzerman have a better legacy than players like Dionne.

I know, it was more of a joke towards a certain fanbase

 

[Frank Drebin]

It matters. There's a reason that players like Sakic and Yzerman have a better legacy than players like Dionne.

Thats a fair point. Same goes for Vasi vs Price/Luongo/Lundqvist.

But the thing about these comparisons of legacies, is that the above players were similar. Yzerman/Sakic/Dionne were stars, but never considered the best players in the world. Vasi/Price/Luongo/Lundqvist all long term elite goalies. Plus Dionne was actually known as a playoff underperformer.

Chris Osgood winning the cup in 2008 doesn't elevate him above the three aforementioned goalies without one.

Yzermans cups don't elevate him above McDavid. Neither does Jack Eichels, or Nik Kucherovs. Or Crosbys for that matter.