Crosby and Kucherov are less than 6 years apart in age, every season in Kucherov's career, Crosby has played, a few "surprising" comparisons

[Wester]

I don't even know if Kuch has 10 breakaways this year.

I know last year despite winning the Art Ross he was snakebit on breakaways, I don't remember how many did he have, but didn't score on any of them

 

[Nadal On Clay]

He's not even in that second group.

He will be by the end of his career.

 

[qcal1427]

He will be by the end of his career.

It requires a lot of projecting out for a 31yo. Not everyone is Ovi.

 

[daver]

It requires a lot of projecting out for a 31yo. Not everyone is Ovi.

He is more like pacing towards Stan Mikita/Guy Lafleur range at this point but even that need some work.

 

[TheLegend27]

(3) the issue you are not only ignoring but spreading misinformation on is the quality of linemates unless you think Point/Guntzel are worse players than Rakell/Rust?

Do you?

1. Crosby needs certain wingers to preform to the best of his ability. That’s why Kunitz was invited to team Canada, to appease Crosby and create the best fit for him.

2. Crosby’s wingers preform just as or nearly as well with Malkin. Malkin posted a dominant Hart win on a line with Kunitz and James Neal. Kunitz was still your typical 60 point player with Malkin in charge. Point/Guntzel don’t perform nearly as well when off Kucherov’s line.

3. As others have mentioned, Kucherov has had a larger point separation from his teammates than Crosby. It’s fair to say that a larger point separation indicates greater independence from line-mate production. Crosby was more dependent on his linemates than Kucherov. I agree in a vacuum Kucherov has had better linemates. I would say all things considered, the impact the difference in linemates quality has had is negligible.

 

[Matsun]

I guess people are conveniently forgetting the player Stamkos was before his injuries?

Stamkos was great before his injuries, but he wasn't scoring 100 points in 21-22 without Kucherov.

With Kucherov	GP	G	A	P
Stamkos	46	29	42	71
Without Kucherov
Stamkos	35	13	22	35

I think Kucherov was inflating Stamkos' point totals for a while. It's interesting how Stamkos was looking done and then rebounded as a consistent top 15 PPG scorer right as Kucherov ascended.

Season	GP	PPG	PPG finish	Note
2014-15	82	0,88	19	First season after injury
2015-16	77	0,83	31
2016-17	17	1,18	3	First PPG season for Kucherov
2017-18	78	1,10	11
2018-19	82	1,20	11	First Art Ross for Kucherov
2019-20	57	1,16	11
2020-21	38	0,89	33	Kucherov miss the season
2021-22	81	1,31	11
2022-23	81	1,04	31
2023-24	79	1,03	28
2024-25*	80	0,65	130	Stamkos leaves Tampa

I think Crosby is ahead of Kucherov, just to make that clear though.

 

[Caps8112]

different scoring enviroments, stategies, special teams totals and most importantly, goaltenders. the goalies of the last 5 years or so do not compare to the goalies of the first half of crosbys career. Kuch is great but he wouldnt break 100 back in the 06-12 era

 

[Empoleon8771]

It's also worth pointing out that Crosby's career points/game has declined because he's been playing in his mid/late 30s while Kucherov is still basically in his prime. Kucherov has 992 points in 801 games so far, which is a career 1.24 PPG. After Crosby's age 31 season, he had 1216 points in 943 games, which is a career 1.29 PPG, while Crosby was playing in a substantially lower scoring era than what Kucherov has been playing in. Crosby "only" has a 1.15 PPG from age 32 onward, which is why his PPG has fallen to be equal to Kucherov's.

 

[wetcoast]

The points gap between him and his wingers shows that it doesn't

Look this is silly as most people know that Kuch plays with better linemates, your inability to acknolwdege this is why exactly?

 

[ITM]

It may be instructive to point where Kucherov points when noting Tampa's success: Not at himself, but at Vasilevsky.

Pittsburgh has never had one of those.

Great player and I think peak Kucherov is in the second tier of greatest players conversation. If only because he's doing Peter Forsberg, Sergei Fedorov type things during his peak, but with better numbers (era notwithstanding).

Better than Sidney Crosby? How does one approach that at these different stages? The six years makes a lot of difference. And as much as I think what Ovechkin did was tremendous, if I'm starting a team and I have the option of picking one, I'd pick Crosby.

Perhaps a footnote to this is looking at Malkin's career vs Kucherov's, nationality aside. Peak Malkin was every bit as dominant as Crosby...and maybe...a better overall peak for a snapshot period. Monstrous talent.

 

[TheLegend27]

different scoring enviroments, stategies, special teams totals and most importantly, goaltenders. the goalies of the last 5 years or so do not compare to the goalies of the first half of crosbys career. Kuch is great but he wouldnt break 100 back in the 06-12 era

The guy who finished with a higher PPG than McDavid three times(including this year) won’t get 100 points in say… 2007 or 2009?. Really?. So Daniel Sedin does it but Kucherov doesn’t?.

 

[Beyonder91]

Look this is silly as most people know that Kuch plays with better linemates, your inability to acknolwdege this is why exactly?

Because Kucherov would still be putting up crazy totals if he was playing with Rust and Rakell.

 

[shello]

Good point. Brayden Point probably wouldn't have scored 40 goals twice, 50 goals once and Stamkos wouldn't have his 100 point season without playing with Kuch. They are still great players, but Kuch makes them even better.

They also make Kucherov a better player too

 

[Regal]

While Kucherov’s great, the recent questions of his place in history are too focused on point totals imo. It’s not that he’d be scoring substantially less with lesser linemates, but whether he’d tilt the ice enough 5v5 without an elite transition player. Prime Crosby didn’t need that, and I think it’s a big factor in what separates Kucherov from the very best of Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin

 

[Master P]

He could score 170 points and outscore his closest teammate by 90 pts and people would still say things like "Yeah but look who he's playing with" etc...

 

[wetcoast]

1. Crosby needs certain wingers to preform to the best of his ability. That’s why Kunitz was invited to team Canada, to appease Crosby and create the best fit for him.

Your whole argument is dead in the water as we have seen Crosby's just excel breaking into the NHL and being elite from day 1.

Some of the Ovi fan bois were going Malkin but they reguarrily didn't even play together at ES for most of their career.

Crosby in 10-11 simply illustrates this point to the extreme.

2. Crosby’s wingers preform just as or nearly as well with Malkin. Malkin posted a dominant Hart win on a line with Kunitz and James Neal. Kunitz was still your typical 60 point player with Malkin in charge.

Point/Guntzel don’t perform nearly as well when off Kucherov’s line.

Sure why would they as there is no 11-12 Hart caliber Mlakin on TB right?

3. As others have mentioned, Kucherov has had a larger point separation from his teammates than Crosby. It’s fair to say that a larger point separation indicates greater independence from line-mate production. Crosby was more dependent on his linemates than Kucherov. I agree in a vacuum Kucherov has had better linemates. I would say all things considered, the difference in teammate quality is negligible.

You have spewed a ton of diversion to somewhat acknowledge that Kuch has much better linemates than Crosby lately.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Crosby's only peer in this modern era is McDavid and I think most fans would admit there's a gap between McDavid and Kucherov. These stats in the OP are cherry picked and lack a ton of context.

Honestly, what is so cherry picked? The context of scoring era is of course important, but only point is really that Crosby's still an active player and been around in the scoring era as well. Both Crosby and Kucherov missed extended time in their prime. If those years with missed time were true "peak Crosby", we also got to see enough full seasons of "peak Kucherov" even with all the lost stats from those injured years.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

It requires a lot of projecting out for a 31yo. Not everyone is Ovi.

You’re right. Kucherov has shown no signs of declining, though. 3 more seasons where he finishes top 3 in points would place him right on pace to be with those guys. Kucherov also has a much better playoff resume than all of Ovechkin, Jagr and Hull.

 

[Wester]

They also make Kucherov a better player too

Yea that is why statistically our actual best line this year is Hagel-Cirelli-Kucherov

 

[WarriorofTime]

Age 23
Crosby 1st in PPG
Kucherov 5th in points, 6th in PPG

Age 24
Crosby 1st in PPG
Kucherov 3rd in points, 5th in PPG

Age 25
Crosby 3rd in points, 1st in PPG
Kucherov 1st in points, 1st in PPG



Kucherov's advantage has come at age where Crosby had already cemented his legacy. He had nothing left to prove in the regular season. Noone takes Kucherov over Crosby until age 30 and even then, I am not sure the majority take Kucherov over a 30 year old Crosby if they had to choose.

Yeah here's the rub of where things start really getting off track a bit.

It all goes back to how to project out Crosby's 3 partial seasons of 2010-11 through 2012-13 with monster point per games but real production of 66, 37 and 56 points. Should they be projected out at ahead of Kucherov's now three *full* seasons that are more productive on an adjusted basis than any season in Crosby's career? I know you've used these partial seasons to definitively conclude that in fact Crosby is McDavid's equal. One interesting thing to note with Crosby though is he has a number of healthy seasons before and after this stretch, and never was able to duplicate that level of production over a full season.

Notably Kucherov's 0 games in 2020-21 makes it an N/A, but Crosby's 22 game season in 2011-12 is a "1st in PPG" season. Touche for Crosby. Then Kucherov plays in the postseason and dominates that season though.

Without the cap implications and if Kucherov comes back with like 10 games left and puts up say 15 points (in line with his production from subsequent seasons in full seasons and based on his postseason seems possible), is his legacy changed in any way because he has a very partial season PPG dominant season? Perhaps I suppose. It's certainly a valid point of contention to point out that Kucherov, like Crosby, missed significant chunk of time in his prime, making it not so simple as to say "oh well Kucherov had more health luck", but the difference also has proof of maintaining production over full seasons.

 

[Old Gregg]

Because Kucherov would still be putting up crazy totals if he was playing with Rust and Rakell.

37yr old Kucherov would be putting up 89pts with current Rust and Rakell? I doubt it

 

[x Tame Impala]

Honestly, what is so cherry picked? The context of scoring era is of course important, but only point is really that Crosby's still an active player and been around in the scoring era as well. Both Crosby and Kucherov missed extended time in their prime. If those years with missed time were true "peak Crosby", we also got to see enough full seasons of "peak Kucherov" even with all the lost stats from those injured years.

EDIT: Kucherov missed a lot of time as well

Crosby played 63 games during the 2010/11 and 2011/12 seasons, as a 22 and 23 year old. He VERY likely adds to his trophy case significantly had he not missed that time. Crosby also, via injuries, missed an all but guaranteed Ross season in 2013 too.

Kucherov's PPG being nearly identical to Crosby's may seem like an argument in your favor but Crosby has maintained that PPG into his late 30's. Kucherov is 32 next season and has plenty of room to fall. It remains to be seen how much of a drop we'll see from him and to be fair he may not drop much at all.

Kucherov's higher point totals are very impressive but I don't think it's a stretch to say Crosby in his 20's and early 30's would be producing at minimum to Kucherov's level in today's NHL. I don't think the gap is closing between the two at all. To say that is to either not have watched Crosby at all or not remember how amazing of a player he was in his prime. Kucherov is a HoF player and one of the best players of his generation, he's not top 5-10 all time like Crosby. There's simply a difference between the two, the same way there's a difference between McDavid and Kucherov.

 

[Stephen]

Part of it has to be playing in Tampa Bay.

Tampa Bay has an excellent organization and has put together really competitive Cup-winning teams over the decades.

But I don't think their footprint on the league is as substantial as many of the more traditional markets.

I think he'll get a bit of the Jagr treatment where his reputation will rocket upwards as he becomes more of an elder statesman of the game, provided he doesn't leave for the KHL prematurely or something.

I don’t think people will warm up to Kucherov over time. For whatever reason he’s in the Kovalchuk bucket, held at arms length. Probably a mix of his own prickly personality on and off the ice and Tampa’s relatively small footprint in the game as you’ve cited.

 

[NyQuil]

I don’t think people will warm up to Kucherov over time. For whatever reason he’s in the Kovalchuk bucket, held at arms length. Probably a mix of his own prickly personality on and off the ice and Tampa’s relatively small footprint in the game as you’ve cited.

You're probably right. Depends on whether Kucherov can lighten up a bit and I'm not sure if that's going to happen.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I don’t think people will warm up to Kucherov over time. For whatever reason he’s in the Kovalchuk bucket, held at arms length. Probably a mix of his own prickly personality on and off the ice and Tampa’s relatively small footprint in the game as you’ve cited.

Kucherov is a little harder to dismiss than Kovalchuk though