If we're looking at players who show up come playoff time, Matthews isn't even qualified to hold McDavid's jockstrap.He'll be seen as the Auston Matthews of the Western Conference.
How would another Stanley Cup Final loss impact McDavid's legacy?
- Thread starter Hwkkul
- Start date
Crosby2010
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2023
- 1,032
- 2,063
42 points last year and a Conn Smythe trophy. 26 points going into the Cup final this year. Not going to hit 40 points or anything, but will get over 30. Even in a loss it is clear McDavid shows up when it counts. McDavid and Draisaitl are those rare breeds of players that look good even in losses. And the stats show it. Doug Gilmour was one of them. To a lesser extent Theo Fleury had spectacular 1st rounds in losses. Brad Marchand, Mark Messier and let's face it, Gretzky is included here. Plenty of players who show up and look great even in losses. Gordie Howe comes to mind too. Lots of them. But McDavid certainly is part of this group. How much more could he have done last year?
The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
Making the finals is better than not making them , Losing in the finals = bad is some ridiculous concept that basketball fans came up with to not give Lebron his flowers
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
What do you think McDavid feels about how not winning the Cup affects his legacy?
Mike C
Registered User
At this point, I think a win affects him positively obviously but a loss doesn't hurt him at all in light of the fact that A) he got there and B) the loss is to a dynastic team that would be going back to back in their 3 straight finals
In the end, if he NEVER wins one, he will be Dan Marino, maybe more like Jim Kelly
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
Imo the all time greats are in two tiers. Writhing those tiers they are ranked lower if they never led their club to a Cup. They’re still in their tier, but lower. I also firmly believe these all time great players (obviously McDavid is in this group) see the Cup is key to their legacy.
Imagine McDavid, Crosby, Mario, and Gretzky having a sit down drinking some wobbly pops and sharing hockey stories. And McDavid has no Cup. Imo that would eat at him.
Unless it’s explicitly his fault, it wouldn’t impact his legacy at all.
The apples to oranges was used intentionally to point out the absurdity of what you talked about in the reply.
Guy Lafleur played for the Montreal Canadiens. Marcel Dionne played for teams lucky to break .500 from time to time. Gilbert Perreault played for a team that couldn't find a decent goalie most seasons. So Lafleur's legacy gets esteemed because he played on a stacked team that was one of the greatest dynasties of all time.
So just as well to do so for Jarvis and Risebrough too since they were on those same teams.
Hockey is a team sport and anyone-ANYONE- who uses team achievements to boost the case for an individual player as the greatest, or better than another player, a great legacy etc has failed to exercise logic.
If playing on a dynasty doesn't propel Jarvis or Risebrough to the all time greats lists, then that alone tells everyone that team achievements are ridiculous to use for ANY individual player.
In fact, it's nothing more than a mere cognitive bias.
Conspiracy Theorist
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2016
- 5,756
- 2,250
There will be a lot of hot takes if he loses again, but it depends if he ever wins. There will always be people who say Sid was better if he doesn't get a cup.
ZeHockeyFan
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2014
- 2,357
- 606
Nonsensical post. He's proven himself to be one of the best ever to play the game. Win or lose, he's going to pull his weight regardless and will be a HHOFer on first ballot.
Hey now, let's not forget about Mike Gartner. Dude oozed clutchiness through that 'stache
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 23,643
- 16,822
Why does winning a Cup bump a player up a tier? Even if that player sets scoring records, he still needs the team to play exceptionally well to win the Cup.
Hockey2Hockey
Registered User
Nobody is saying McDavid isn't a great postseason player. Or, that a team can't win with them as his best player. It's obvious a team with him as their best player is better off than had it been anyone else.
The story is not finished if he loses to Florida. Because his career won't be done. If he completed his career without a cup, he won't be considered a top six player ever. Ovechkin and Crosby will be ahead. Is that fair to hold it against him? Probably not. But it will.
As for the bolded, had he shown up sooner in games 1-3, maybe a near miracle comeback isn't necessary. They put themselves in a position where they needed to be mistake free for four games.
GMR
Registered User
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 29,353
- 27,162
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
Leading a team to a Cup doesn’t (imo) bump a player up a tier. What leading teams to Cups doesn’t is help arrange those greatest of players within their tier.
That’s a fans perspective. IMO McDavid wants a Cup to cement his legacy. He’s on a mission, much like the greats before him were when leading their clubs to Cups.
Again, imagine, when these guys are all retired, McDavid talking hockey with Crosby, McKinnon, Makar, and he’s the only one without a Cup. Imo that would eat at him.
Only a fool would put Ovechkin ahead of McDavid.
This is why using Cups as a metric is a serious cognitive and logical flaw in reasoning and argument.
It wouldn’t change my opinion of him as one of the greatest playoff performers ever. But I think it matters a lot to him personally in terms of his legacy. I also think that people shouldn’t assume he will get a lot of more cracks at the SCF. History shows that’s not necessarily the case. Hockey is not like basketball where two or three superstars can decide to get together and form a juggernaut. A lot needs to go right to get to the Finals.
Indeed. And that is why he is arguably the greatest of his generation and definitely an all time great.
That is what separates the true greats from the second tier- desire to win.
You probably remember Kent Nilsson, right?
Mr. Magic Man!
The Alexei Kovalev of his generation.lol
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
Using leading a club to rank players within their tier of greatness certainly is fine.
OV, imo, isn’t in the same tier as McDavid though, so his leading a club to the Cup makes no difference when comparing the two players. Crosby is, imo, in the same tier as McDavid. His leading a club to multiple Cups places him higher in that tier.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
I guess it all depends on how many players are put into each tier. I certainly wouldn’t have the two you mentioned in a tier with McDavid.Indeed. And that is why he is arguably the greatest of his generation and definitely an all time great.
That is what separates the true greats from the second tier- desire to win.
You probably remember Kent Nilsson, right?
Mr. Magic Man!
The Alexei Kovalev of his generation.lol
I would put McDavid in the top ten all time tier though. Just without leading his club to a Cup he’d be 10. Lead the Oilers to this Cup (which I think he’s going to do) then he moves up.
That could have some merit but it assumes equal teams though. Those who did win had the fortune of playing with a strong supporting cast.
If Gretzky played on the Leafs, he would've won nada. After all, he won nothing in LA while the Oilers won again in '90 without him.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,251
- 20,592
But Wayne didn’t play for the Leafs. We could say the same for Dionne. 1700 points. Never on a good enough club to win a Cup. Or was he not good enough to lead an average club to the Cup?
Clearly McDavid is in a tier above Dionne. I place him in the top tier of 10 with best ever. But until he leads a club to winning a Cup he’s at the bottom of that tier.
