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

[Arthur Morgan]

It takes time for greatness to be placed into context and then to evolve into legendary status. Back when I started watching hockey, the consensus all-time greatest were Rocket Richard, Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Doug Harvey, Bobby Orr... a few others I'm forgetting. Nobody could imagine a new guy muscling his way ahead of these legends.

And then a decade or so later, two guys named Wayne and Mario entered the league.

Give McDavid time. Over time, he may exceed greatness and become legendary.

I think he will reach legendary status anyways by the end of his career I just dunno if anyone will place over those 3. right now it feels next to impossible but you do make a good point

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Not even the 2nd best Oiler

 

[TheSuperElite]

is it possible that Howe may become the most overrated player in history?

 

[Dr Pepper]

No, he won't.

is it possible that Howe may become the most overrated player in history?

No, he won't.

 

[BraveCanadian]

There will never be the same kind of gap, dominance of peers, because the competition is so much better. It’s like track and field where runners are now winning by nanoseconds while in the past the gap was a couple of seconds.

This was certainly the narrative being made the last decade and a half to explain why there were no more Gretzky/Lemieux/Jagr like seasons even though Crosby was supposedly the best hockey player ever!@!! and playing against the best competition evar!!@!!.. until McDavid came along and showed it to be completely false the past few years.

A new argument will be needed to explain why today's bionic superheroes don't measure up.. because McDavid is starting to measure up to the greats.

 

[Adam da bomb]

This was certainly the narrative being made the last decade and a half to explain why there were no more Gretzky/Lemieux/Jagr like seasons even though Crosby was supposedly the best hockey player ever!@!! and playing against the best competition evar!!@!!.. until McDavid came along and showed it to be completely false the past few years.

A new argument will be needed to explain why today's bionic superheroes don't measure up.. because McDavid is starting to measure up to the greats.

Interesting you put jagr up there with Gretzky and Lemieux as one of the greats.

Mcdavid did it for 2 years. That’s different than doing it for 8 years, because it can’t be done there is too much parity in the league. The league is different, faster. There is fewer lumbering d/ men. You can’t obstruct the same way. The amount of ice time the teams usually give the bottom 6 is different.

Crosby could have been better if he had been healthier, though I doubt if he ever becomes one of the greatest.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Interesting you put jagr up there with Gretzky and Lemieux as one of the greats.

Jagr is definitely the lesser of Gretzky and Lemieux but he did have some separation from the pack that disappeared for stars post lockout until we had a real generational talent again in McDavid.

Mcdavid did it for 2 years. That’s different than doing it for 8 years, because it can’t be done there is too much parity in the league. The league is different, faster. There is fewer lumbering d/ men. You can’t obstruct the same way. The amount of ice time the teams usually give the bottom 6 is different.

McDavid did it but it is impossible because the league is too good?

Press X to doubt. You're literally contradicting yourself.

Crosby could have been better if he had been healthier, though I doubt if he ever becomes one of the greatest.

Yes, but people were all over the boards claiming he was the best player ever in a vacuum because the league was supposedly so good and the only reason he didn't have big seasons was parity and blah blah blah.. then McDavid shows up and nukes the argument from orbit.

There are plenty of reasons to doubt the league is always better line of thinking.

 

[tarheelhockey]

is it possible that Howe may become the most overrated player in history?

In what way? He was the consensus best player of the first 80 years of professional hockey. That’s a pretty big pool of competition, probably bigger than the competition of any single generation.

Being the standout player in a group that large rightfully puts him up there in conversation with the best player of the 60s/70s (Orr), 80s/90s (Gretzky/Lemieux), 00s/10s (Crosby), and 10s/20s (McDavid).

 

[Video Nasty]

Lemieux already had is Draisaitl, Jagr.. Mcdavid is Jagr prime. Jagr had 5 scoring title in a row in dead puck era without Mario on a terrible Penguin's team

Jagr won four in a row and required Mario coming out of retirement during the back half of the fourth to make him care for a little while longer.

Paints a slightly different image than the false five in a row without Mario story.

 

[NVious]

Not even the 2nd best Oiler

He has some work to do to pass Hyman, probably won't happen but Conrad can dream.

 

[VanIsle]

There is no way he is better then Lemieux/Orr in their prime . . . . .

Maybe 4 if he is lucky. . . .

 

[sfvega]

I'm admittedly biased because Mario was maybe my favorite player ever, but having watched both I can't say that I think McDavid is better or more gifted. He's closing the gap, but it's still there.

 

[NotASheep]

He needs to win more cups than messier to be number 2 on the oilers. Sorry. The Moose was S important as gretz was

 

[RooBicks]

Jagr is definitely the lesser of Gretzky and Lemieux but he did have some separation from the pack that disappeared for stars post lockout until we had a real generational talent again in McDavid.

Can we stop with this already? The comparison is laughable.

Jagr was great. He was also a non-factor with strikingly low compete levels whenever the games mattered, and nobody was afraid to play him in those circumstances. Forsberg, Sakic, Lindros, and others (Messier in the early '90's... hell, Kariya, half the Red Wings) were all consistently and repeatedly better players when the chips were down. Jagr is the greatest and most supremely talented passenger to ever play the game. He had "generational" tools and yet struck fear into nobody as a team leader or in "the big game." In fact, he never really even got into any of those unless he was playing on absolutely stacked teams. If you want to include the 1998 Olympics, let's be real: he wasn't a major factor. He was 20th in tournament scoring with 5 points (1 goal, 4 assists) and everything hinged on Hasek and the defensive structure used to support him. He was tied with a guy named "Pavel Patera" from his own team in points and behind him and Martin Rucinsky in goals.

Crosby led teams at all levels to the promised land and was always the most feared player on the ice when the chips were down. That includes Malkin's Conn Smythe year, when Crosby was the defensive priority in every single series they played, which decidedly worked to Malkin's benefit. McDavid is much closer to that than he is to Jagr.

 

[CycloneSweep]

Id say 3rd. It's Gretzky and Lemieux at the top. McDavid imho will be 3rd. MAYBE 4th.

 

[Overrated]

is it possible that Howe may become the most overrated player in history?

not as long as the boomers live

 

[Overrated]

Lemieux already had is Draisaitl, Jagr.. Mcdavid is Jagr prime. Jagr had 5 scoring title in a row in dead puck era without Mario on a terrible Penguin's team


Ovi is not in that Jagr Tier. Ovi is notch below.

Bourque too

 

[blundluntman]

If you think McDavid has a chance to finish 2nd all time, Howe should be the final frontier, not Lemieux/Orr. Howe has just as many art rosses as Lemieux, double the amount of Harts, double the amount of 1st AST finishes and proved he wasn't a product of a less competitive era by putting up superstar level numbers at 40 in a league with Orr, Esposito, Hull and Mikita.

Lemieux and Orr are often ranked 2nd/3rd because of their peaks, not accolades/accomplishments (although that definitely plays a role as well, especially with Orr).McDavid simply will never catch Lemieux and Orr as far as peaks go; his only chance is to finish ahead in awards/accolades/longevity. If you think that's what's going to propel him to #2, your rankings should be:

Gretzky
Howe
Orr/Lemieux

 

[BraveCanadian]

Can we stop with this already? The comparison is laughable.

Jagr was great. He was also a non-factor with strikingly low compete levels whenever the games mattered, and nobody was afraid to play him in those circumstances. Forsberg, Sakic, Lindros, and others (Messier in the early '90's... hell, Kariya, half the Red Wings) were all consistently and repeatedly better players when the chips were down. Jagr is the greatest and most supremely talented passenger to ever play the game. He had "generational" tools and yet struck fear into nobody as a team leader or in "the big game." In fact, he never really even got into any of those unless he was playing on absolutely stacked teams. If you want to include the 1998 Olympics, let's be real: he wasn't a major factor. He was 20th in tournament scoring with 5 points (1 goal, 4 assists) and everything hinged on Hasek and the defensive structure used to support him. He was tied with a guy named "Pavel Patera" from his own team in points and behind him and Martin Rucinsky in goals.

Crosby led teams at all levels to the promised land and was always the most feared player on the ice when the chips were down. That includes Malkin's Conn Smythe year, when Crosby was the defensive priority in every single series they played, which decidedly worked to Malkin's benefit. McDavid is much closer to that than he is to Jagr.

Don’t know what you’re on about.. we were talking about separation from peers in scoring.

If we’re changing the subject for no reason but for you to randomly rant.. My 2 cents is that Jagr was great in the playoffs.

Particularly as a youngster taking over (along with Francis) when Lemieux was out on the cup run, and beating a heavily favoured NJ team on one leg.

But you do you

 

[Bust]

There, I said it.

The big 4 has been mythologized and deified but it’s been fine since no player has made a compelling argument to question the sanctity of it until now.

Crosby made an argument for 5th best of all-time but even without losing those three seasons of his prime, I don’t think he was ever a serious threat to Howe/Orr/Super Mario.

McDavid is peaking higher than Howe right now. He’s simply a better player and I’m done pretending that he’s not. (Insert Joker meme).

Howe has legendary longevity but Connor has been very healthy and shows no signs of slowing down. Even if he doesn’t match Howes’ longevity (who can) I value the peak more.

Also, far be it for me to discredit the OG’s, we simply have to factor into the equation that Howe played in a 6 team league against almost exclusively Canadians. We simply have to acknowledge how much more competition McDavid has. He’s being trailed in the scoring race by a German, Russian, and Czech. That simply didn’t happen in Howes’ day.

Connor isn’t nor will he peak higher than Mario or #4 but neither player reached even 1000 games.

If McDavid wins 7-8 scoring titles and 5-6 MVP’s and plays 1400 games I think you have to put him number #2 all-time.

Either way, it’s incredible what we are witnessing right now.

Thoughts? Will McDavid be #2 of all-time when the dust settles?

I think attempting to rank players from different generations is a futile exercise and cannot be done without bias.

We’re getting older boys…

I believe McDavid has earned the right to be up there with the big boys, and will be the 5th member of hockeys “Mount Rushmore”.

McDavid is unbelievable and will be considered a great when it’s all said and done.

 

[Tryblot]

Can be top 5 without a cup.

 

[nowhereman]

This was certainly the narrative being made the last decade and a half to explain why there were no more Gretzky/Lemieux/Jagr like seasons even though Crosby was supposedly the best hockey player ever!@!! and playing against the best competition evar!!@!!.. until McDavid came along and showed it to be completely false the past few years.

Uh, yeah, no... we both know that didn't happen. The overwhelming majority of people simply said that 80s/90s Gretzky and Lemieux-type numbers were not possible in the modern NHL and, that if both played in today's game, they'd only be in the 150-160 point range most years. And if you think McDavid's 153 point season is comparable to a typical Gretzky season, then those people were right.

The thing is, McDavid only has 1.5 seasons that compare to Gretzky's 8-9 big seasons or the handful that an oft-injured Lemieux posted. It's a miraculous peak but, as far I'm concerned, he's just not as good as anyone in the top 4 and is a better offensive version of Jagr/Crosby – not a peer of the guys at the very top of the mountain.

 

[TheBeard]

is it possible that Howe may become the most overrated player in history?

Personally I think Gretz is. Unpopular opinion I get it, he was good, no doubt. Still a top 5 of all time in my books, which sounds crazy since I said he was the most overrated in history. People talk of him as so much better than anyone else by a landslide, but I also look at the talents he played with and how they no doubt inflated his numbers. Messier, Coffey, Kurri - all top 50 players all time as well, and Anderson top 100.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Uh, yeah, no... we both know that didn't happen. The overwhelming majority of people simply said that 80s/90s Gretzky and Lemieux-type numbers were not possible in the modern NHL and, that if both played in today's game, they'd only be in the 150-160 point range most years. And if you think McDavid's 153 point season is comparable to a typical Gretzky season, then those people were right.

Uh, yes it did from many posters. Now they have moved on to McDavid because hand-waving talent pool, parity, salary cap blah blah. Oh, and they are still wrong if they think a 153 point season matches a typical Gretzky peak season.

The thing is, McDavid only has 1.5 seasons that compare to Gretzky's 8-9 big seasons or the handful that an oft-injured Lemieux posted. It's a miraculous peak but, as far I'm concerned, he's just not as good as anyone in the top 4 and is a better offensive version of Jagr/Crosby – not a peer of the guys at the very top of the mountain.

That is why Lemieux is the most vulnerable member of the big 4. He missed so much time that his relatively few truly great seasons can be matched with if McDavid can manage a few more plus really good longevity.

 

[RooBicks]

Don’t know what you’re on about.. we were talking about separation from peers in scoring.

If we’re changing the subject for no reason but for you to randomly rant.. My 2 cents is that Jagr was great in the playoffs.

Particularly as a youngster taking over (along with Francis) when Lemieux was out on the cup run, and beating a heavily favoured NJ team on one leg.

But you do you

You want to dog Crosby and act as if he is a step (or more) below Jagr. There's no possible argument for that claim. 32/32 teams in the NHL would take prime Crosby over prime Jagr in a vacuum, and they'd be right. You clearly dislike the guy, which is your right, but trying to prove his inferiority by referencing Jagr's overall point totals isn't even close to telling the whole story.