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

[bobholly39]

And to add to the above:

I admit that McDavid not winning the Ross this season (and likely not the Hart either as a result) puts a small dent in my lofty career projections for him.

You gotta win your age 27 season scoring race when it's a full season and Mack and Kuch both beating him outright makes it less of a sure thing he wins the next few titles.

That said, he was clearly injured to start the season, fell 22 points back of the lead and still managed to take the lead back temporarily. Now he's looking like he might become the 3rd ever player to score 40 points in a playoff season.

So even in a year where he finishes 3rd in RS scoring, I think he still proved he's by far the greatest offensive force in the league. Noone else comes back from a 22 point deficit to retake the lead. I fully expect McDavid to win min. 3 of the next 5 Rosses.

Few things.

1. I think there are some ridiculous career projections for McDavid thrown about in this thread. I'm pretty sure in a post a few days ago I saw you suggest McDavid might hold this level for ~7-8 more years. If McDavid doesn't decline and maintains his peak for 7 more years, he's going to blow past Gretzky all-time. But that's never going to happen, because everyone declines, and so will McDavid. He probably has another 2-3 seasons max at his peak, and then will likely start to slow down.

2. McDavid won't go down as the 2nd best player of all-time.

3. There's a chance McDavid might make the big 4 into a big 5, or at least become the concensus #5 pick - but to me making the big 4 into a big 5 means he can be argued above one of the big 4 - but I don't see a path for him to be consensus #2. Too high a bar. Simply put - he's not as good as Lemieux nor Orr were

4. I actually disagree with you about this season being a missed opportunity on Ross, as I think it's a season that ranks very high for him. In my opinion, McDavid so far in his career has done 5 things worthy of being deemed truly "special", maybe even "big 4 worthy", and they are:

A. 2021 season. Yeah it's a short season, but his level of domiation was insane (season only - playoffs were horrendous, and I truly thought he may have been a lost cause for playoffs in his career after that showing, but he's certainly proven me wrong since).

B. 2022 playoffs. Through 2 rounds - he was giving peak Gretzky/Lemieux a run for their money for best 2 round playoff round ever, with no adjustment needed. Insane. Yes it's only 2 rounds (he did ~ok in 3rd round, but they were swept), but was still a special performance

C. 2022-2023 regular season. The best/greatest non "big 4" season ever. Led league in points, assists and goals. Hit a milestone of 150+ points that everyone assumed was impossible in this era.

D. 2023-2024 regular season. True that his point toals were down, and true that he didn't win art ross, and he certainly scored a ton less goals.... BUT - it's an absolutely amazing turnaround he was able to lead the Oilers on. From 2nd to last place in standings, with an absolutely horrible record so many games below 500, to making the playoffs and scoring 130+ points and 100+ assists. This may not be his absolute best season - but I still think it's a really special one. It's his 3rd best/most important season after 2021 & 2023, even if he gets no trophies for it

E. Current playoff run. We'll see if he can win the cup/smythe - but he's entering the finals with 31 points, good chance he becomes the 3rd player ever to reach 40+ points in a playoff run after Gretzky & Lemieux

So in summary - no I don't think McDavid will go down #2 all-time. Way too high a bar. But I'm open to the possibility of him re-shaping the big 4 into a big 5

 

[solidmotion]

judging by peak performance and skill level he's clearly in the discussion for top 5.

beyond that it will come down to his accomplishments by the end of his career compared to howe, orr, and lemieux.

fwiw people forget that those 3 have holes in their resumes too. orr and lemieux both won only two cups and lost multiple playoffs they should have won (71, 74, 93, 96 at least). howe was only a key contributor to 3 cups. great playoff resume outside of those cups but still. also his peak is overrated because it didn't quite overlap with beliveau's and he wouldn't have won as many rosses/harts if it had.

just to say that if mcdavid does win a couple cups while putting up historic numbers that goes a long way toward matching orr and lemieux. and he can be forgiven for losing a ross/hart in his prime if he wins a few more down the line. lots of ifs but the point is that outside gretzky there are no untouchables as far as mcdavid is concerned.

 

[HFpapi]

Few things.

1. I think there are some ridiculous career projections for McDavid thrown about in this thread. I'm pretty sure in a post a few days ago I saw you suggest McDavid might hold this level for ~7-8 more years. If McDavid doesn't decline and maintains his peak for 7 more years, he's going to blow past Gretzky all-time. But that's never going to happen, because everyone declines, and so will McDavid. He probably has another 2-3 seasons max at his peak, and then will likely start to slow down.

2. McDavid won't go down as the 2nd best player of all-time.

3. There's a chance McDavid might make the big 4 into a big 5, or at least become the concensus #5 pick - but to me making the big 4 into a big 5 means he can be argued above one of the big 4 - but I don't see a path for him to be consensus #2. Too high a bar. Simply put - he's not as good as Lemieux nor Orr were

1) When I say "this level" for 7-8 more seasons I mean as an elite player among the leagues best and compiling meaningful season for his all-time status. I don't necessarily mean 150 points and odds on favourite to win the Ross/Hart every year otherwise my projections for him would be like 10 Hart & 12 Ross instead of what I actually project which is 5/6 Hart and 7/8 Ross.

Saying on the low end he has maybe 2 years of peak left is crazy. Dude is 27 and these playoffs showing he might only be approaching his best now. Players (especially McDavid types) don't just fall off a cliff at 31. McDavid might have 12-13 100 point seasons if he can keep putting up 100 points until 34ish. Not outlandish at all.

2) It makes no sense to declare that so confidently considering the career McDavid has had up until now at only 27.

3) He doesn't have to be as good as Orr or Lemieux, he only needs to be almost as good (which he is) but play for much, much longer. Orr played 650 games. Mitch Marner will pass him in games played next year. Acting like there's nothing McDavid can do to overcome the slight peak gap makes no sense. He might win 2-3 more Harts and 2-3 more Ross than Mario. That's an entire HOF career worth of trophies over and above what Lemieux won.

 

[Video Nasty]

Not in my books. Crosby is a winner.

Time is ticking on that position. You’ll have to think of a new one soon.

 

[TheFinalWord]

I think it is likely that he will be viewed in the top 5 by most people when his career is over. I don't think most will have him over Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux (no order), but I think you will see more arguments for him at 4 vs Howe. I think he has or will have passed Crosby without question. He's a special player. I hope he wins a Cup, so then perhaps decides he wants to come back home to Toronto and try to win one here.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Not in my books. Crosby is a winner.

So if he wins a cup in two weeks then what?

 

[Dog]

Top 4 eventually but right now ranked 104 in career points in regular season. Next year probably drop into 60+ range if no major injuries/illness. This is all guessing but think he will end up close to 2000 points by end of career.

 

[archangel2]

He will need 6 cup wins to get that

So if he wins a cup in two weeks then what?

And how many cups do both Crosby and Mario have? One cup vs 3?

 

[HFpapi]

Top 4 eventually but right now ranked 104 in career points in regular season. Next year probably drop into 60+ range if no major injuries/illness.

So how is Orr top 4 when he's 121st in career points (and dropping)?

It's almost like that isn't the best way to evaluate.

He will need 6 cup wins to get that


And how many cups do both Crosby and Mario have? One cup vs 3?

Mario has 2. Which, according to your logic, means he's about as good as Dustin Brown.

 

[Dog]

So how is Orr top 4 when he's 121st in career points (and dropping)?

It's almost like that isn't the best way to evaluate.


Mario has 2. Which, according to your logic, means he's about as good as Dustin Brown.

I think it's different because of injuries and how Orr carried the bruins point wise. He set the standard for defenseman. He was doing things no other defenseman ever did at the time before Coffey and Bourque.

 

[DitchMarner]

If McDavid never wins a Cup, he'll easily be the best player never to have won one and the lack of a Stanley Cup will definitely be held against him (whether it should or not). For a player that good to never win a Cup is unprecedented. Granted, there are more teams now than ever before.

However, if he does win one, will that many people really care if he finishes his career with one, two or multiple Stanley Cups? It is a team award and he's been a very good playoff performer in recent years. He just needs to avoid that stigma of never winning the Cup at all.

Cup counting does not equal good player evaluation.

 

[archangel2]

So how is Orr top 4 when he's 121st in career points (and dropping)?

It's almost like that isn't the best way to evaluate.


Mario has 2. Which, according to your logic, means he's about as good as Dustin Brown.

Messier has 6 cups. I have him 2. Mario 3 sid 4

 

[Hockeyholic]

If McDavid never wins a Cup, he'll easily be the best player never to have won one and the lack of a Stanley Cup will definitely be held against him (whether it should or not). For a player that good to never win a Cup is unprecedented. Granted, there are more teams now than ever before.

However, if he does win one, will that many people really care if he finishes his career with one, two or multiple Stanley Cups? It is a team award and he's been a very good playoff performer in recent years. He just needs to avoid that stigma of never winning the Cup at all.

Cup counting does not equal good player evaluation.

This year is his best chance though.

So not winning this year is going to make it extremely difficult to win in the future. This is assuming he signs with Edmonton next summer.

You are correct in that a player of his stature never winning a cup is unprecedented.

 

[HFpapi]

Messier has 6 cups. I have him 2. Mario 3 sid 4

You have Mark Messier #2? And Sid above Orr and Howe?

I'll be polite about it and just not saying anything other than I think most would disagree with you.

 

[slapKing]

You have Mark Messier #2? And Sid above Orr and Howe?

I'll be polite about it and just not saying anything other than I think most would disagree with you.

Anyone who has Messier 2nd is smoking the good stuff.

 

[HFpapi]

Anyone who has Messier 2nd is smoking the good stuff.

It's a take so perplexing and indefensible it made me not want to dunk on it for fear the poster might be really young or new to hockey.

 

[CanadienShark]

See, I think it suffers from the opposite more than as you've described.

I do think younger and maybe more casual fans will be quick to place guys like Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid, Yzerman, Sakic etc near the top and overlook the Beliveau, Harvey, Richard's of the world but in general I think players get frozen in place and mythologized to the point that any conversation of current players being better than them gets shut down immediately.

Look at the History boards most recent top 100 and how populated it is with people who played in the 1960's and earlier.

In the top 30 we have Howe, Bobby Hull, Beliveau, Harvey, Richard, Morenz, Shore, Kelly, Plante, Nighbor, Mikita, Hall.

Now, what's the realistic chance that roughly 35% of the top 30 players ever were produced at a time when the entire NHL was Canadian when Canada had about 13 million people?

There's 10 players on the list born in the 1800's (played in the 1920's). So in 100 years of hockey there's basically a perfect 10% of the best ever players who played in the 1920's (10 each decade). What are the chances of that when you consider how immensely the talent pool has grown? I mean, there was probably more registered hockey players globally last year alone than there were in the first 20 years of the NHL's existence combined.

This is a top 100 post for you, possibly top 5. We'll know at the end of your career.

 

[HockeyWooot]

He’s probably borderline top 10 based on his body of work right now, and a good shot at top 5.

The rest will be dictated by championships.

Of course hockey is a team game that can’t just be won by a single player, but at the end of the day performance at the highest level counts.

GOAT status is not a thing to be taken lightly, in a sport where the “real season” is the one that counts it would be hard to call him 2nd greatest of all time without a couple cups.

Without the cup he will never be considered second best of all time, rather “greatest never to win it all”. It is what it is.

He may or may not win one this year but I’d be shocked if he doesn’t win a cup or several when all said and done. He’s that good.

 

[docbenton]

I've always hated lionizing historical players. None of those players are even close to McDavid or even some of the other top players of today.

The NHL of older times was worse than ECHL level, barely a competent player in sight. Maybe during Gretzky and Lemieux's time it was comparable to the AHL, but that's probably a compliment. Yes the equipment was worse, but the play on the ice was unwatchably bad. It's completely irrelevant how many cups a player won during those times or how many points they put up, there was barely hockey being played by today's standards.

 

[CanadienShark]

I think it'll be a competitive finals. It shouldn't be any worse than Tampa vs Montreal or Pittsburgh vs San Jose..

Hey!

 

[Sasha Orlov]

He will need 6 cup wins to get that


And how many cups do both Crosby and Mario have? One cup vs 3?

Right so Charlie Huddy > Mario and Crosby then

 

[Albatros]

Not individually he hasn't. Crosby has won more team awards in a team sport.

Crosby joined the worst team in the league and turned them into a powerhouse within 4 years. Sure they also added some support like Malkin and Letang that made them better overall, but Crosby was absolutely key to their team success. Without him the Penguins don't win three cups, probably not even one. Every ring is also his personal achievement.

 

[Sabre the Win]

McDavid is more dominant than Crosby ever has been on the ice. Just watching that goal in Game 7 he scored is more impressive than anything Crosby has done on ice. McDavid absolutely willed that goal through an entire team (a good team at that).

When I saw that goal, I simply said "wow" and I could not think of a time in the last decade a goal impressed me more. Its left an impact on me.

 

[norrisnick]

Sure Howe is more rounded physically and defensively, but at a certain point I’m not sure how much more value that can add for a winger when we’re talking about players at this caliber of offense when they’re already heavily tilting the ice. I’d say if McDavid can have a similar offensive career with more competition, it might be seen as a big enough advantage to make up for the all around game. Obviously still a long way off though.

I'm sure it will because offense is all that survives over time.

 

[x Tame Impala]

McDavid will need more than a Cup and a Smythe to be better than Mario