Is Connor Mcdavid a "tier above" Sidney Crosby as a player?

[zenator]

Strange to say, but yes, just as Gretzky and Lemieux were a tier above Bryan Trottier.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Tier 1 - Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, McDavid

Tier 2 - Howe, Crosby

lawl

 

[Three On Zero]

Tier 1 - Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Howe

Tier 2 - Crosby, McDavid

Fixed

 

[PainForShane]

McDavid's game relies on his genius hockey IQ, speed, and insane hands. He skates like Bure, passes like Crosby & stickhandles like Datsyuk. "Soley speed" is a terrible description of his game.



Tier 1 - Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, McDavid

Tier 2 - Howe, Crosby

These are both reasonable answers thanks for sharing.

Out of curiosity (and I mean this sincerely), for you is McDavid still Tier 1 if he doesn't win at least one championship? For me that's what keeps him below the very, very best (which for me includes Hasek). Just trying to understand where you're coming from thanks!

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

How was Hyman any more established than those two?

He was a free agent in his prime, without injury history, that just played on top lines in Toronto.

Between hyman, kunitz and dupuis, which ones point total increased most significantly once joining McD and Sid?

Definitely Dupuis, he had 21 points in his last 85 games.

Dupuis had a career high of 48 points before joining penguins. Had a peak season of 59 on the Pens.
Kunitz had a high of 60 points before joining pens. Peaked at 68 on the Pens.
Hyman had a high of 41. Has currently peaked at 83 on Oilers.

Oh, so you’re being intellectually dishonest, and so you are surprised you are getting the same kind of replies back. Let me join the fun! Evander Kane was a top line 30g, 56p guy before being put on McDavids wing, and McDavid made him worse! McDavid sucks y’all, don’t look at anything else.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

The actual f***?

Yeah, and Lindros' big body will totes hold up better than say Patrick Kane's tiny frame...

Concussions took out Lindros. You can’t lead with the elbow anymore. You can thank Crosby a little for that, the cheap shot he got from Steckel changed a lot of internal policies and the crack down began.

 

[Grifter3511]

He was a free agent in his prime, without injury history, that just played on top lines in Toronto.

Definitely Dupuis, he had 21 points in his last 85 games.

Oh, so you’re being intellectually dishonest, and so you are surprised you are getting the same kind of replies back. Let me join the fun! Evander Kane was a top line 30g, 56p guy before being put on McDavids wing, and McDavid made him worse! McDavid sucks y’all, don’t look at anything else.

Yes, because I think the whole notion is ridiculous.

Edit: surprised by the replies? Yours is the first reply.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Yes, because I think the whole notion is ridiculous.

Edit: surprised by the replies? Yours is the first reply.

You were in a heated discussion with multiple posters about the notion of McDavid not making his teammates better. It got so heated that you decided to pretend Crosby got an up and coming Dupuis coming off a career high, and that he got a veteran winner in Kunitz who was coming off a career high as well.

Let’s not stop with your logic at these players. Let’s apply it to Evander Kane then, and demonstrate how McDavid made him a worse player.

 

[Grifter3511]

You were in a heated discussion with multiple posters about the notion of McDavid not making his teammates better. It got so heated that you decided to pretend Crosby got an up and coming Dupuis coming off a career high, and that he got a veteran winner in Kunitz who was coming off a career high as well.

Let’s not stop with your logic at these players. Let’s apply it to Evander Kane then, and demonstrate how McDavid made him a worse player.

I think you're mistaking my posts for someone else's. I made 2 posts total on the last page and they were both to do with one poster.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Yes.

Tier 1 - Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux.....Howe

Tier 2 - Crosby/McDavid + lots of others (Hasek, Jagr, Roy, Beliveau, etc)

I think talent-wise Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux are a tier above Howe (or half a tier), but not for overall career. So I left him in same tier.

If you give Crosby 0 major injuries in his career - and project his missed time towards the upper echelon of possibilities - good chance he comes very close to Howe career + peak-wise. Connor McDavid is on pace to do....exactly what this hypothetical no-injury Crosby might have done. Is McDavid doing even better than this hypothetical Crosby? That's possible too, that he's slightly better - definitely same tier though.

I think your tiers are occupying too wide of a variance.

The purpose of a tier is to establish a level of player that is comparable - as in it could go either way.

There is no rational argument for Lemieux or Orr over Gretzky. In fact Gretzky takes a giant dump on their careers, game-for-game, and then has another hall of fame career after that (relative to Orr at least). So they cannot be on the same tier.

A more rational set would be more like:

Tier 1: Gretzky alone

Tier 2: Gordie Howe alone

Tier 3: Lemieux and Orr (assuming longevity is worth practically nothing)

Tier 4: Ovechkin, Crosby, Bobby Hull, Beliveau, Jagr, McDavid (projecting some here), Hasek,

Tier 5: Yzerman, Messier, Maurice Richard, Lidstrom, Bourque, etc.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

I think you're mistaking my posts for someone else's. I made 2 posts total on the last page and they were both to do with one poster.

Well I guess pretending you never posted something is better than owning up to your ridiculous reply. That I literally quoted.

Beyond the ridiculous notion that a guy putting up 100 ASSISTS isn’t making his teammates better, look at their stats. Kunitz and Dupuis were the exact same player that they were in Pittsburgh before they ever got to Pittsburgh.

How was Hyman any more established than those two? Between hyman, kunitz and dupuis, which ones point total increased most significantly once joining McD and Sid?

Dupuis had a career high of 48 points before joining penguins. Had a peak season of 59 on the Pens.
Kunitz had a high of 60 points before joining pens. Peaked at 68 on the Pens.
Hyman had a high of 41. Has currently peaked at 83 on Oilers.

This you?

 

[Grifter3511]

You were in a heated discussion with multiple posters about the notion of McDavid not making his teammates better. It got so heated that you decided to pretend Crosby got an up and coming Dupuis coming off a career high, and that he got a veteran winner in Kunitz who was coming off a career high as well.

Let’s not stop with your logic at these players. Let’s apply it to Evander Kane then, and demonstrate how McDavid made him a worse player.

I mean, you can if you want to. I only posted once I saw the post that said Crosby turned dupuis and Kunitz into legit players and hyman already was one. IT WASNT ME THAT INTRODUCED THOSE PLAYERS TO THE CONVERSATION SO THAT IS WHY I REFERENCED THEM. It wasn't me cherry picking players. It was a response to the exact players (minus sheary) that the poster I was responding to brought up.

So if you'd like to go through all their linemates and see how many improved and how many didn't, more power to you. It does not change my opinion that both Crosby and McDavid make their linemates better. The idea that Crosby has some gene in him, or some teaching- qualities that causes him to make his teammates better in ways the McDavid doesn't is ridiculous at worst, utter speculation at best.

Well I guess pretending you never posted something is better than owning up to your ridiculous reply. That I literally quoted.



This you?

Yes...that is my First post about the topic. So can you please show me my long, heated debate with multiple posters?

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

I mean, you can if you want to. I only posted once I saw the post that said Crosby turned dupuis and Kunitz into legit players and hyman already was one. IT WASNT ME THAT INTRODUCED THOSE PLAYERS TO THE CONVERSATION SO THAT IS WHY I REFERENCED THEM. It wasn't me cherry picking players. It was a response to the exact players (minus sheary) that the poster I was responding to brought up.

Can you enter into a conversation about players while being intellectually honest? You portrayed Crosby as having gotten Kunitz and Dupuis at their career highs. Not only that, but you claimed their play never improved from him.

So if you'd like to go through all their linemates and see how many improved and how many didn't, more power to you. It does not change my opinion that both Crosby and McDavid make their linemates better. The idea that Crosby has some gene in him, or some teaching- qualities that causes him to make his teammates better in ways the McDavid doesn't is ridiculous at worst, utter speculation at best.

The idea that Crosby might be better at teaching somebody something than another player shouldn't be foreign to you. You seem new to hockey. Some players go into coaching afterwards because they have an inherent teaching quality that others don't.

Yes...that is my First post about the topic. So can you please show me my long, heated debate with multiple posters?

I just want you to be intellectually honest in your replies my guy. I don't want to get into a conversation on semantics with you. This is clearly a very unimportant point that you want to use to take attention away from your ridiculous comments in this thread.

 

[bobholly39]

I think your tiers are occupying too wide of a variance.

The purpose of a tier is to establish a level of player that is comparable - as in it could go either way.

There is no rational argument for Lemieux or Orr over Gretzky. In fact Gretzky takes a giant dump on their careers, game-for-game, and then has another hall of fame career after that (relative to Orr at least). So they cannot be on the same tier.

A more rational set would be more like:

Tier 1: Gretzky alone

Tier 2: Gordie Howe alone

Tier 3: Lemieux and Orr (assuming longevity is worth practically nothing)

Tier 4: Ovechkin, Crosby, Bobby Hull, Beliveau, Jagr, McDavid (projecting some here), Hasek,

Tier 5: Yzerman, Messier, Maurice Richard, Lidstrom, Bourque, etc.

I was focusing more on tiers as players - and less on the word career. Since that's what the poll question is.

Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux are similar tier players. Yes - career-wise, Gretzky did much better, maybe even in a separate tier if you want.

 

[Grifter3511]

Can you enter into a conversation about players while being intellectually honest? You portrayed Crosby as having gotten Kunitz and Dupuis at their career highs. Not only that, but you claimed their play never improved from him.

The idea that Crosby might be better at teaching somebody something than another player shouldn't be foreign to you. You seem new to hockey. Some players go into coaching afterwards because they have an inherent teaching quality that others don't.

I just want you to be intellectually honest in your replies my guy. I don't want to get into a conversation on semantics with you. This is clearly a very unimportant point that you want to use to take attention away from your ridiculous comments in this thread.

Be honest. Be honest!

Lol. You're ridiculous dude. Have a good one.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

I think your tiers are occupying too wide of a variance.

The purpose of a tier is to establish a level of player that is comparable - as in it could go either way.

There is no rational argument for Lemieux or Orr over Gretzky. In fact Gretzky takes a giant dump on their careers, game-for-game, and then has another hall of fame career after that (relative to Orr at least). So they cannot be on the same tier.

A more rational set would be more like:

Tier 1: Gretzky alone

Tier 2: Gordie Howe alone

Tier 3: Lemieux and Orr (assuming longevity is worth practically nothing)

Tier 4: Ovechkin, Crosby, Bobby Hull, Beliveau, Jagr, McDavid (projecting some here), Hasek,

Tier 5: Yzerman, Messier, Maurice Richard, Lidstrom, Bourque, etc.

You just put the greatest goaltender of all time in tier 4. Then you put the 2 best defenders of the last 50 years in both terms of skill but also longevity and career in teir 5? What the hell would a defenseman have to do to get to tier 4 or higher? Why is Orr not just an entire tier above Bourque/Lidstrom, but two?

 

[SweSensFan]

This is simple. Want points, highlights, Art Trophies?

Take McDavid

Want leadership, your team performance to level up, Stanley Cups?

Take Crosby.

Perfect first comment and there is nothing to add. Somehow people managed to discuss it for 27 pages. I just 1+ your statement and will not bother reading the rest!

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Be honest. Be honest!

Lol. You're ridiculous dude. Have a good one.

You too buddy! Don't just avoid me on here, if I see you in public on the street, you best be crossing and walking the other way.

 

[BelovedIsles]

Crosby has many layers to his game, Whereas McDavid relies almost solely on his speed

Neither are defensive stalwarts but Crosby easily wins this.

Both are known heavily for their embellishing and over the top whining

The layers are poignant. McD is multi-dimensional, yet one-dimensional. There was so much depth to Sid’s game.

Honestly, I miss it; such a unique player.

 

[Crow]

Same tier. I'd choose Crosby, but it's reasonably close.

I'd say one big thing giving Crosby the edge, in my mind, is injuries: I think McDavid's game depends more on his skating and as such, any kind of knee or heel injury could end him, whereas Crosby has a more well-rounded game and can perform better as he loses his peak physical attributes.

What the hell?

Crosby actually lost a lot of games do to injury at his peak. McDavid didn’t, but if he did, he would be worse is what makes Crosby better? lol.

 

[blundluntman]

Connor's the wizard, obviously.

Let's not forget he also cast dark magic on 4th overall pick Pulju to limit his career to 118 points over 356 games so far (currently 27 point pace / 82GP and decreasing). And he looks to be casting spells on guys like Holloway and Yamomoto but at least his spell on Hyman seems to have been effective

Or they're just not good hockey players? Being drafted 4th overall doesn't automatically make you some stalwart whose career potential is in the hands of their teammates (rather than themselves or their... coaches?) Players develop chemistry with each other, they don't magically give them buffs like WoW. This whole "Crosby makes his teammates better than McDavid" shtick has little to no real-life evidence whatsoever to back it up outside of team success-driven narratives.

 

[Midnight Judges]

You just put the greatest goaltender of all time in tier 4. Then you put the 2 best defenders of the last 50 years in both terms of skill but also longevity and career in teir 5? What the hell would a defenseman have to do to get to tier 4 or higher? Why is Orr not just an entire tier above Bourque/Lidstrom, but two?

It's just an example - not meant to be a definitive list. Not even my definitive list.

I'm just making the point that a tier ought to have players who are at least arguably above or below each other. Otherwise, what the heck does a tier do?

But the point also is made for the many people saying McDavid is definitely better but not on a different tier.

 

[Letsdothis]

Connor's the wizard, obviously.

Let's not forget he also cast dark magic on 4th overall pick Pulju to limit his career to 118 points over 356 games so far (currently 27 point pace / 82GP and decreasing). And he looks to be casting spells on guys like Holloway and Yamomoto but at least his spell on Hyman seems to have been effective

Weird considering who he plays with, right?

 

[GreatGonzo]

A quick adjustment just going by league goals per game average has his 94 in 03/04 come out to 113, his 99 in 10/11 comes out to 110, and his 60 in 48 games in 12/13 comes out to 68, an 117 point pace in 23/24. That is just by doing a quick adjustment using league goals per game averages, which is far from perfect. I did not take into account other top scorers totals which can easily skew it another -/+ 5-10 points. Just because he didn't hit those totals in 06 and 07 does not mean he couldn't hit those numbers in other seasons, it just means those he wasn't good enough to hit those totals those particular years we're talking about. Kucherov and Mackinnon never even paced for more than 130 in similar seasons as 23/24, yet they both hit 140+.

And yes I know I wasn't going to reply anymore, but I was actually curious to see what the numbers came out to, and they're pretty close to what I suspected.

Sure those numbers are closer than I thought but there is still a lot of context there. For example, the adjusted numbers aren’t perfect and don’t guarantee anything. But also I’m still not convinced because again, ‘06 and ‘07 were similar scoring environments. He didn’t even get close to those numbers. You say that doesn’t matter but it does considering MSL had all the opportunities to do so, but he just wasn’t that kind of player.

There’s also the argument of Stamkos. Like, if you drop MSL in today’s league, does Stamkos come too?

You keep bringing up other players point totals as ways of saying, “if so and so can do it, why not MSL??”

No, they weren't. Kunitz was nowhere near the level he'd become with Pitt (or team Canada), neither was Dupuis. Moreover Dupuis was on his fourth NHL team and hadn't scored 20 goals for 5 years prior to joining Pittsburgh, his career was very much on a downward trajectory. Everyone knows both of these things. Also others like Sheary, I addressed all of this in a previous post.

Hyman has certainly put up higher totals with Edm, but he is just one guy and I think we all know one guy is not enough to make a pattern (also addressed in my post). Especially when you consider high draft picks like Yamo and Pulju have really struggled in Edm. On the other side, Sid has consistently helped improve his teammates his entire career, and it's helped the Penguins win cups.

That's the important part of this. McDavid is a great individual player -- no one would doubt this -- but he hasn't been able to win even one cup yet. Until he does, I'm going with the also consistently elite player who, unlike McD so far, has been able to lead his team to multiple Stanley Cups

It’s almost like there’s tons of context there or something…

 

[pth2]

What the hell?

Crosby actually lost a lot of games do to injury at his peak. McDavid didn’t, but the fact if he did, he would be worse is what makes Crosby better lol.

I guess I just feel Crosby has a wider talent base, whereas McDavid's is narrower, and one injury could easily derail his entire career, more so than Crosby, who maintained his excellence despite his injuries.