NotAVacuumSalesman
Positive Mistake Culture™
- Jun 19, 2017
- 4,174
- 8,581
He’ll finish with 3-4 cups by the time he’s done.
I wouldn’t worry about it.
I wouldn’t worry about it.
He's the fastest guy in the NHL. What?Nah he uses a lot of deception at all times even when he's stationary on the powerplay. You can't break a Wayne Gretzky assist record (most assists in a playoff run ever) by just being fast.
Probably minimal impact. Basically like when Kevin Durant went and joined Golden State after losing to them. Didn’t give his legacy the boost it would have otherwise. In fact, it probably hurt it depending on who you ask since it was viewed as extremely anticompetitive. I don’t think it would hurt McD’s legacy, but joining the two time defending champion who beat you twice to get your cup isn’t exactly the stuff of legend.Here's an unlikely hypothetical:
McDavid loses the SCF. Joins Florida. They threepeat next season. McDavid has 18 points in 21 games.
Does that impact his legacy at all. Or will people just look at the fact he won a cup?
Here's an unlikely hypothetical:
McDavid loses the SCF. Joins Florida. They threepeat next season. McDavid has 18 points in 21 games.
Does that impact his legacy at all. Or will people just look at the fact he won a cup?
I think if he repeats winning the Conn Smythe if Florida repeats as Cup champs, it would actually enhance his legacy. Only 5 players besides him have ever accomplished it once. Being the only player to do so twice would be historic. Him doing so twice in a row would be legendary.With the Panthers and Oilers facing off again in the Stanley Cup Final, and if Florida wins.. how do you think that impacts Connor McDavid's ultimate hockey legacy? Will he still be seen as an all-time legend if he can't win the biggest prize, even if it's not entirely his fault?
I understand the main concept that you are presenting here.This may strike people as a gross oversimplication but it really does get to the heart of the matter:
If you could go back in time and you're a GM in the 70s, are you going to take Marcel Dionne or Gilbert Perreault or do you take Doug Risebrough or Doug Jarvis?
Using this logic that winning a Cup (or making it past a certain round or winning first overall in the standings), the argument would lead to taking a Risebrougy or Jarvis.
To use any team achievement for an assessment of a player is utterly ridiculous. Is MacDavid supposed to step into Skinner's pads and make all thr necessary saves and them promptly go back up the ice and score?
If he did that, he would earn Kevin Durant level of criticism.Here's an unlikely hypothetical:
McDavid loses the SCF. Joins Florida. They threepeat next season. McDavid has 18 points in 21 games.
Does that impact his legacy at all. Or will people just look at the fact he won a cup?
of course winning is everything, have you ever met a pro player?I find this obsession with winning the stanley cup strange
as if it the ONLY thing that matters for a hockeyplayer and the rest
doesnt mean anything, well then Henri Richard is the best Hockey player
of all time, Kane is better then Lemiuex, Messier is better then Gretzky
and Tretiak was as good as me.
i havent been around here for that long, but has this always been the
debate? or is it just a fixation with McDavid? same with Ovi? same with barkov?/cause this season is the same season as it is for Mcdavid now, when barkov made his first final
None of that tarnished Gretzky because Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups prior to any of that, putting up all-time great statistics in the process.The Oilers won without Gretzky.
The Kings lost with Gretzky because Guy Carbonneau was able to mostly neutralize him.
None of that appears to have tarnished Gretzky's legacy. Even if Florida wins it's not going to take away McDavid's reputation as the best player currently in the NHL.
I know exactly who you are referring to here.depends how long it takes to retire from his equipment making him itchy
it would haunt him like a hell rest of his lifeNone of that tarnished Gretzky because Gretzky won 4 Stanley Cups prior to any of that, putting up all-time great statistics in the process.
McDavid losing this year? Not a huge deal for his legacy. But only if he wins some time else in the future.
Finishing with 0 Stanley Cups would definitely hurt his legacy.
Just like Crosby's legacy and Ovechkin's legacy (if we want to talk about recent players) would have suffered with 0 Stanley Cups.
If Crosby and Ovechkin are held to a "Stanley Cup or lesser legacy" standard, then it is fair to hold McDavid to the same standard.
For a player?Cups alone aren't the only thing that matters. Or how high do people rank Jean-Guy Talbot?
It won't matter.
The only thing that will affect his legacy, right or wrong, is if he never wins one. Even with his Conn Smythe. Once he gets one, it doesn't matter how many... Kind of like Ovechkin.