Historical relevance of Kucherov and MacKinnon's 2024 season?
- Thread starter daver
- Start date
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 29,825
- 18,051
sakic keeping pace with mario-aided jagr in 2001?
henrik sedin winning the art ross during peak years by both ovechkin and crosby?
henrik sedin winning the art ross during peak years by both ovechkin and crosby?
VanIslander
20 years of All-Time Drafts on HfBoards
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Yzerman 89 or Sakic 01 come to mind. That they're both doing it is historically unusual. But they're clearly peak seasons in a very impressive manner.
For Vs5, this season's Kucherov is below Kucherov 2019. As of today, Vs5 over 1.20 in the last 10 seasons
McDavid 21 - 1.59
McDavid 23 - 1.38
Kane 16 - 1.29
Kucherov 19 - 1.28
Draisaitl 21 - 1.27
Kucherov 24 - 1.25
MacKinnon 24 - 1.23
Now, 5 will float a bit. With everyone being healthy and playing well maybe Vs10 is better. Same time frame, 1.25 or higher
McDavid 21 - 1.69
McDavid 23 - 1.50
Draisaitl 20 - 1.41
Kucherov 24 - 1.40
Kane 16 - 1.38
MacKinnon 24 - 1.37
Draisaitl 21 - 1.35
McDavid 17 - 1.33
Kucherov 19 - 1.33
McDavid 24 - 1.33
McDavid 22 - 1.27
Draisaitl 23 - 1.25
Really, any way you stretch it all three are having very impressive seasons that would be Hart worthy in a normal season.
They're all also very clearly behind McDavid 23 and McDavid 21. McDavid 21 is, to me, the season you can point to as a true Big Four esque domination. McDavid 23 is more of a best non-Big Four season.
For Vs5, this season's Kucherov is below Kucherov 2019. As of today, Vs5 over 1.20 in the last 10 seasons
McDavid 21 - 1.59
McDavid 23 - 1.38
Kane 16 - 1.29
Kucherov 19 - 1.28
Draisaitl 21 - 1.27
Kucherov 24 - 1.25
MacKinnon 24 - 1.23
Now, 5 will float a bit. With everyone being healthy and playing well maybe Vs10 is better. Same time frame, 1.25 or higher
McDavid 21 - 1.69
McDavid 23 - 1.50
Draisaitl 20 - 1.41
Kucherov 24 - 1.40
Kane 16 - 1.38
MacKinnon 24 - 1.37
Draisaitl 21 - 1.35
McDavid 17 - 1.33
Kucherov 19 - 1.33
McDavid 24 - 1.33
McDavid 22 - 1.27
Draisaitl 23 - 1.25
Really, any way you stretch it all three are having very impressive seasons that would be Hart worthy in a normal season.
They're all also very clearly behind McDavid 23 and McDavid 21. McDavid 21 is, to me, the season you can point to as a true Big Four esque domination. McDavid 23 is more of a best non-Big Four season.
In terms of PPG dominance vs. Top 10/25/50, Sakic's 00/01 season is not in the same tier as the seasons/players mentioned. Jagr, even with Mario-aided, was clearly more dominant vs. the field in 98/99 and 99/00.
Same for Sedin, good season but not anywhere close to the domination vs. Top 10/25/50 plus Ovechkin missed games in 09/10 and Crosby wasn't at his peak.
To put things into perspective:
Kucherov's PPG is 69% better than #25, and 90% better than #50
McDavid's 22/23 PPG was 76% better than #25, and 99% better than #50
Jagr's 98/99 PPG was 74% better than #25, and 107% better than #50
IDK, 2023 and 2024 are virtually identical in terms of scoring by the Top 10, 25 and 50.
If Kucherov puts up a 1.77 PPG vs. McDavid's 1.87 PPG in the same season, does it still elevate McDavid to Big Four esque?
And there are too many variables in 2021 (7 team division, 56 game schedule) to give full marks to it. Is it fair to give that "Big Four esque" status while Crosby's level of play from 2011 (41 games) or 2013 (3/4's of a season) is not regarded as being as overly relevant in all-time rankings.
Offensively, I think McDavid is clearly ahead of his direct, career peers like Howe was of his era peers but is not closer to Wayne/Mario level than others have been.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
McDavid is 27, when Crosby was 27 he got beat by Benn for the Ross in a healthy season.
You're also ignoring multiple reasons why the Big 5 talk gained steam last year. He had 153 pts but also had 64 goals. And as of today neither Kucherov or MacKinnon are that close to his season, Kucherov is 1st in points at 133, 20 short of McDavid. But last season also gave McDavid his 3rd Hart, 5th Ross and 4th Pearson and made it so that only Gretzky/Howe/Shore have more Harts and Gretzky/Mario/Howe have more Ross wins.
Top 10/25/50 dominance is as much dependent on league talent depth as it is domination. For a season that "was not statistically close on Mario/Wayne level", kind of ironic that McDavid beat #2 in scoring last year by a higher % than Lemieux ever did
What does this have to do with anything?
So are Kucherov's and Mac's season superior to McDavid's this year because they have more goals?
Of course there are close to that season. If you want to wait two more weeks for the final numbers, we can but we are over 90% through this season.
And Crosby had the highest % of victory for over a 30 year span that included THREE of Mario's Art Ross wins and all FIVE of Jagr's.
As for "Top 10/25/50 dominance is as much dependent on league talent depth as it is domination", can you provide some seasons where the Top 50 talent varied so much as to render any of the seasons mentioned in the OP as meaningless?
Are you arguing that there has been a significant shift of talent from last season to this one?
gretzkyoilers
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2012
- 464
- 419
Given McDavid's very slow start (likely due to injury), this is an "off" year for the Art Ross. I suspected without that slow start he could have bettered 153 points. He is shooting way less, so that factors in as well. I am surprised it is that close. That being said Mario in 1992-1993 after missing 20 games due to cancer is not the same...
Matsun
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2010
- 635
- 530
At their 10 game mark:
Kucherov 10 points
McDavid 10 points
20 mark:
Kucherov 35 points (his 20th game was 6 points, at 19 games they were neck and neck)
McDavid 29 points
25 games:
Kucherov 42 points
McDavid 40 points
To me it looks like both McDavid and Kucherov had slow starts, and they both started catching fire around the same time.
I think that hockey has only truly had 3 players that were "unbeatable": Orr, Wayne, Mario. Everyone else can be beaten by a peaking top 30 player. Peak Trottier can beat Lafleur in a scoring race, I even think peak Mikitita/Geoffrion might've challanged Howe in a peak season. I don't think McDavid has built up the resume to be considered unbeatable, or get the benefit of the doubt when it looks like he will lose to an all time great having his peak season.
Crosby2010
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2023
- 1,443
- 1,336
I think it is important to remember that Kucherov had 128 points in 2019 and handedly beat McDavid for the Art Ross. I guess you can argue that McDavid hadn't quite hit his peak yet, but he still had 116 points and there were no injury issues or anything that year. So while it is a bit of a surprise that Kucherov and MacKinnon are both doing it, I think Kucherov quietly racks up shocking point totals that don't always get the most attention. But yeah this has 1989 written all over it.
BraveCanadian
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2010
- 15,380
- 4,682
It does have a bit of that kind of feeling to it with scoring being up and so many players cashing in on that.
TheStatican
Registered User
- Mar 14, 2012
- 1,731
- 1,512
Gretzky and Lemieux were NEVER bested by anyone but each other during their primes, in full healthy seasons. Kucherov and MacKinnon as great as they are - and clearly they were being underrated going into this season, are still nowhere near the BIG 4.
No Lemieux, and Gretzky wins the Ross at least 12 years in a row - Stevens is not scoring 123 on his own. No Gretzky, and Lemieux likewise wins the Ross at least 12 years in a row with just normal durability - Messier's, Hull's, Federov's & Jagr's totals of 129, 131, 120 & 70 would have been trivial for him to surpass in 80 or 70-odd games. Meanwhile Connor is about to be beaten for the third time in 8 healthy seasons for the Ross. That's still a mighty fine achievement to be sure, but it's clearly NOT in the Gretzky and Lemieux echelon. It's in the Howe(5 in 7 & 6 total), Esposito(5 in 6) and Jagr(5 in 7, would be 6 in 7 no Mario) territory.
Agreed.
Let's all be honest here, I know there are some who feel like the old time stars of the past are not appreciated as much as they should be, but Howe was never in the Gretzky/Lemeiux/Orr tier talent-wise/based on skills and abilities. He's a clear tier below, which is not an insult - that's the second highest tier ever achieved in hockey history after all with only a handful of players attaining it. But the real reason why he is ranked in the 'big 4' is because of his unsurpassed longevity along with his physically dominating all-round game. Had he been just a little less physically dominate, or had his longevity been normal instead of freakish, he wouldn't be in the Big 4. McDavid is having a Howe-like offensive career, but he doesn't have the same physically dominating presence and until only recently his defensive play has not be notable either. So how can he possibly be elevated to the same level when lacking in many other important variables? Quite simply he cannot.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,560
- 20,652
McDavid has one fewer Art Ross than Lemieux in a significantly more global NHL talent pool. A dude from Arizona was never gonna be closing in on 70 goals during Gretzky/Lemieux's heyday. For all of Gretzky's prime and the vast majority of Lemieux's, a dude from Russia would only be seen in the Olympics or the Eagleson Cup.
You can't call players "unbeatable" if you sare saying they were beat by each other...
TheStatican
Registered User
- Mar 14, 2012
- 1,731
- 1,512
I don't see how anyone could argue that it doesn't affect how we perceive McDavid's performance from 22-23. Kucherov is currently on pace for 145 points, in 81 games to boot. If he achieves that, which he is very close to doing(in a slightly lower scoring season with slightly lower minutes FTR) it places him at 95% of McDavid's peak/96% by PPG. While McDavid's performance remains superior largely thanks to the goals gap, the gap has shrunk tremendously.
Though really the perceived gap was never actually as significant as some people thought it to be. Many ignorantly looked solely at raw point totals and concluded that McDavid was '40 points better' than the next best player in the leauge based on skill and ability alone. It was a failure of epic porportions since those people failed to make considerations for what MacKinnon would have achieved were it not for anything other than sheer/random dumb luck rather than actual skills and ability. It should be clear to all now that the gap between McDavid and a player like MacKinnon was never all that large to begin with considering how clearly and emphatically he has proven himself to be a 130+ point capable player. If not for anything other than that dumb luck this likely would be his second 130-point season in a row.
If were talking strickly about the 80's your point stands but by 92-93 that's just blantly wrong - all the best talent in the world was in the NHL by then. It was a time when multiple "dudes from Russia"(lol) scored 60/70 goals, and gathered 120+ points and Lemieux still dominated over that multi-national field when he played.
The point is not that they were unbeatable, the point is the quality of the player that beat them. The number 1 and 2 greatest offensive players of all time were beaten only by each other. None of their other respective peers even approached their levels. There's little doubt that the inclusion of Soviet talent would have reduced Gretzky's margins of victory in many seasons, but you don't honestly think that anyone of them would have actually bested him during his peak/prime... or do you??? McDavid meanwhile is being beaten by players far below the level of the number #1 or #2 greatest offensive players of all time. He's being beaten by Mike Bossy/Peter Stastny tier players. How differently would we view Gretzky if Bossy, a player who is almost universally seen to be couple of tiers below Gretzky overall, had not only beaten Gretzky for the Art Ross in 1982-83 but also scored 200 points!? That's the equivalent of what Kucherov is currently doing to McDavid and his legacy. On top of that now imagine a THIRD player, say Sergei Markov, also notching 190+ points that season, which is the equivalent of what MacKinnon is doing to him.
Clearly, the predictions of McDavid's supposed ascension into the 'BIG 4' last season were highly premature. I understand that these are exciting days with players notching totals not seen in some time, but far too many are making preposterously advanced predictions. Another example being Matthews future ascension to the GOAT goal scorer... I mean C'MON!
and I say that as a Matthews fan.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,560
- 20,652
There is little way to know for sure.. it's not as though McDavid outscoring Kucherov by some lopsided margins in certain years indicates that Kucherov could never beat McDavid in points in a particular year.
The impact appears to be marginal. You can argue that two, maybe three Top 10ish players are added into the mix which doesn't move the needle that much when looking at % over the #10/25/50 scorers.
When you think about it, adding a star Soviet player moved likely a Canadian player from the Top 6 and the PP1 unit on their team. That is a player who likely sees a drop in their PPG who maybe could have been in the Top 50.
Or maybe it moves a Canadian #1C to the #2C position and lowers their PPG and out of the Top 10/25. Or a Canadian #1 W to the 2nd line and lowers their PPG out of the Top 10/25/50.
IMO, I am willing to give current talent an edge in offensive resumes over similar domination from past eras but dropping or raising talent to other tiers is not close to being reasonable. We have seen enough overlap from McDavid to Crosby to Jagr to Mario to Wayne to reasonably place them on respective tiers.
IMO, we also saw McDavid/MacKinnon/Kucherov/Draisaitl in the DPE 2.0 to question how higher scoring can create wider gaps. I think it is unquestionable that Orr, Wayne. and Mario thrived in an era that saw 5 fold growth and higher scoring but do not question their unbeatability.
Crosby2010
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2023
- 1,443
- 1,336
I have never been of the type that it mattered where the best players in the world came from. Lemieux's prime spanned the 1980s where it was mostly Canadians at the top of the scoring ladder all the way to 1996 where it was a league that Americans and Euros were dominating too. And yet Lemieux still was the best in 1996. 1993 too in a year that had plenty of players from other countries, if that mattered. I don't think it mattered, Lemieux did it against anyone. That's what made him so special. While we're at it, ditto for Gretzky. In 1998 he had 67 assists. He's old and slow and honestly he is a long country mile from what he used to be, and yet he led the NHL in assists. Had as many assists as Jagr that year - who was in his prime - and had more than another great playmaker in Forsberg who was also in his prime. I think that's all you have to say about it. If an old Gretzky in 1998 is still racking up 90 points in a year in a league that had European stars then I think it is safe to say he dominates no matter who you put against him in the 1980s.
Besides, who are we talking about that Gretzky outpointed in his prime? Bossy, Dionne, Trottier, Hawerchuk, Stastny................we can go on. How about as a rookie he outscores Lafleur? I don't think it ever mattered who you put him against. The fact that McDavid can't do it at the level that Gretzky or even Lemieux did is not a knock on him. It is simply because no one else in 100 years did it but those two. McDavid has only three players in NHL history who had more scoring titles than him and he is 27 years old right now. That alone is incredible and at least on the Howe level when it comes to scoring.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,560
- 20,652
I’m not saying Gretzky or Lemieux stink or wouldn’t win trophies in present day. But we are talking about McDavid, he is winning trophies in present day as well. Many in fact. This is more about notions of “unbeatable” and what that means. It’s odd to put Lemieux in an “unbeatable” category when he only ended with one more Art Ross than McDavid has now. Sure injuries are a big reason but injuries are a monster part as well of what makes someone “beatable” or not.
You really need "when healthy" and "without Wayne in the league" qualifiers to understand the point being made?
Peak Jagr doesn't beat a "HEALTHY" Mario. We have seen enough of an overlap in careers to reasonable assess that Peak Jagr and Peak "HEALTHY" Crosby maybe beat peak McDavid.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,560
- 20,652
Jagr won five art rosses. One less than Lemieux. Crosby never bested McDavid for an art ross despite substantial career overlap. Lemieux finished second in art ross exactly once in his entire career. These arbitrary things are killing me, you’re just pulling what you want to.
Did you not read my post? A HEALTHY Mario, in his prime, was unbeatable.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Since we're lawyering the "when healthy" flag...Crosby bested McDavid in 2016. 
But no one is intent on doing anything but talking past each other anyhow right now...
But no one is intent on doing anything but talking past each other anyhow right now...
