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

[pi314]

Relevant points, I’ll be sure to remember that one


Crosbys best scf was ironically in a losing effort

Gonna need a concise definition of what a relevant point is

Guess they should just measure the games as points vs points.

Who needs winning?

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

If you don't f*** around with magically played games and just adjust for scoring levels. McDavid outscores Crosby by 199 points through their first 9 seasons. Getting 199 extra points of offense out of a guy over the same amount of time is most certainly a tier above...

34 pages and people still can't seem to understand the concept of expansion era teams causing inflated scoring, like in the mid to late 70s and early 80s, and again most recently.

Why doesn't Gordie Howe get destroyed on here for his 'low numbers' ? Here is his first 9 seasons:

Season	Team	Lge	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM	+/-	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM
1946-47	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	58	7	15	22	52		5	0	0	0	18
1947-48	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	60	16	28	44	63		10	1	1	2	11
1948-49	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	40	12	25	37	57		11	8	3	11	19
1949-50	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	35	33	68	69		1	0	0	0	7
1950-51	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	43	43	86	74		6	4	3	7	4
1951-52	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	47	39	86	78		8	2	5	7	2
1952-53	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	49	46	95	57		6	2	5	7	2
1953-54	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	33	48	81	109		12	4	5	9	31
1954-55	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	64	29	33	62	68		11	9	11	20	24

At some point people have to acknowledge that the ability to actually play in games counts for more than pretending someone played those games.

At some point you can extrapolate. Sure if Crosby had never managed to put together full seasons of work, or very limited seasons, we could write him off as a Forsberg/Lindros. But that isn't the case here, in fact we have multiple seasons stretching over a decade of Crosby being dominant. He's much closer to a Lemieux/Orr case than a Lindros/Forsberg case.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Guess they should just measure the games as points vs points.

Who needs winning?

Need those intangibles to win

 

[pi314]

If you don't f*** around with magically played games and just adjust for scoring levels. McDavid outscores Crosby by 199 points through their first 9 seasons. Getting 199 extra points of offense out of a guy over the same amount of time is most certainly a tier above...

At some point people have to acknowledge that the ability to actually play in games counts for more than pretending someone played those games.

But the whole league went up in scoring when they shrunk goalie equipment.

Is RNH better than prime Stamkos or Getzlaf?

Gaudreau better than Ovechkin?

Hyman better at scoring than Iginla?

Because according to points, they are.

But they’re not in real life.

Need those intangibles to win

Or maybe tangibly show up in games 6 or 7.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

No it isn't. Because again, your graph is dong a huge extrapolation for Crosby, but not for McDavid,

What 'extrapolation' is needed for McDavid? He has missed little time. Crosby was the one that played in the era of cheap shots and blindsided hits. Can we account for the fact that Crosby played in that era? Or would that just being making 'excuses' for Crosby?

 

[Frank Drebin]

But the whole league went up in scoring when they shrunk goalie equipment.

Is RNH better than prime Stamkos or Getzlaf?

Gaudreau better than Ovechkin?

Hyman better at scoring than Iginla?

Because according to points, they are.

But they’re not in real life.



Or maybe tangibly show up in games 6 or 7.

Maybe you’re right
Maybe McDavid doesn’t have what it takes to win

He doesn’t have what Jack eichel, Braydon point, Ryan o Reilly, Nick backstrom, anze kopitar, toews or David krejci have

Perhaps he’s just not built to win
Doesn’t have what it takes

Or perhaps your argument is dumb as hell
I’m not sure

 

[GreatGonzo]

But the whole league went up in scoring when they shrunk goalie equipment.

Is RNH better than prime Stamkos or Getzlaf?

Gaudreau better than Ovechkin?

Hyman better at scoring than Iginla?

Because according to points, they are.

But they’re not in real life.



Or maybe tangibly show up in games 6 or 7.

It’s amazing how many people talk like scoring today is so easy, any decent player can do it….where as during crosbys days, only the best scored. That’s why Jamie Benn and MSL won scoring titles in crosbys prime…

You mean what Crosby didn’t do in ‘09?

What 'extrapolation' is needed for McDavid? He has missed little time. Crosby was the one that played in the era of cheap shots and blindsided hits. Can we account for the fact that Crosby played in that era? Or would that just being making 'excuses' for Crosby?

Cheap shots and blind side hits are as much of a problem today as they were back then. Stop trying to paint it as if Crosby came in this rugged “80s style” era, all while trying to use it as a romanticized justification for his missing time

 

[Midnight Judges]

What 'extrapolation' is needed for McDavid? He has missed little time.

Exactly - durability is a virtue in all professional sports, no matter how many times hockey fans, and hockey fans alone, try to pretend it isn't.

Crosby was the one that played in the era of cheap shots and blindsided hits. Can we account for the fact that Crosby played in that era? Or would that just being making 'excuses' for Crosby?

Crosby never missed significant time due to any cheap shots - so era has nothing to do with it.

Crosby missed time because he skated with his head down while not looking where he was going.

Pretending missed games are not a negative is history revision.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Didn't happen in the time of cheap shots so don't matter

 

[norrisnick]

34 pages and people still can't seem to understand the concept of expansion era teams causing inflated scoring, like in the mid to late 70s and early 80s, and again most recently.

Why doesn't Gordie Howe get destroyed on here for his 'low numbers' ? Here is his first 9 seasons:

Season	Team	Lge	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM	+/-	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM
1946-47	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	58	7	15	22	52		5	0	0	0	18
1947-48	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	60	16	28	44	63		10	1	1	2	11
1948-49	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	40	12	25	37	57		11	8	3	11	19
1949-50	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	35	33	68	69		1	0	0	0	7
1950-51	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	43	43	86	74		6	4	3	7	4
1951-52	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	47	39	86	78		8	2	5	7	2
1952-53	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	49	46	95	57		6	2	5	7	2
1953-54	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	70	33	48	81	109		12	4	5	9	31
1954-55	Detroit Red Wings	NHL	64	29	33	62	68		11	9	11	20	24

At some point you can extrapolate. Sure if Crosby had never managed to put together full seasons of work, or very limited seasons, we could write him off as a Forsberg/Lindros. But that isn't the case here, in fact we have multiple seasons stretching over a decade of Crosby being dominant. He's much closer to a Lemieux/Orr case than a Lindros/Forsberg case.

But the whole league went up in scoring when they shrunk goalie equipment.

Is RNH better than prime Stamkos or Getzlaf?

Gaudreau better than Ovechkin?

Hyman better at scoring than Iginla?

Because according to points, they are.

But they’re not in real life.

The post you guys are quoting is referring to era adjust point totals, so I have no idea wtf you guys are having issues with here.

 

[PainForShane]

Maybe you’re right
Maybe McDavid doesn’t have what it takes to win

He doesn’t have what Jack eichel, Braydon point, Ryan o Reilly, Nick backstrom, anze kopitar, toews or David krejci have

Perhaps he’s just not built to win
Doesn’t have what it takes

Or perhaps your argument is dumb as hell
I’m not sure

Fwiw I am sure your argument "McDavid is a tier above his current generation (and also historical Crosby) because actually winning the cup doesn't matter" is dumber

 

[Nadal On Clay]

They’re definitely in the same tier. They have different skill sets, but bring a similar impact to their team.

FWIW, here is Crosby vs top 10 players in ppg for his first 9 seasons (2006 to 2014) and McDavid vs top 10 players in ppg for his first 9 seasons (2016 to 2024)

2006-2014 (min 300 GP)

Crosby - 1,40
Malkin - 1,22
Ovechkin - 1,20
Thornton - 1,11
Spezza - 1,06
Datsyuk - 1,06
Savard - 1,04
Stamkos - 1,04
Kovalchuk - 1,04
St. Louis - 1,04

2016-2024 (min 300 GP)

McDavid - 1,52
Kucherov - 1,34
MacKinnon - 1,24
Draisaitl - 1,23
Panarin - 1,16
Matthews - 1,15
Crosby - 1,15
Pastrnak - 1,11
Kane - 1,11
Marner - 1,11

Similar environments with Crosby/McDavid separating themselves from the pack with 3-4 other players and then a logjam from 5th to 10th.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Fwiw I am sure your argument "McDavid is a tier above his current generation (and also historical Crosby) because actually winning the cup doesn't matter" is dumber

5xRoss
3xhart
4xLindsay
Rocket
5x first all star team
Conn smythe trophy

In his first 9 seasons

You have any comparables?

Lets see crosby
2xross
2xhart
rocketx2
3xlindsay
4xfirst all star team
2xconn smythe

Looks a tier above to me

 

[PainForShane]

5xRoss
3xhart
4xLindsay
5x first all star team
Conn smythe trophy

In his first 9 seasons

You have any comparables?

Like I said, your argument that "McDavid is a tier above his current generation (and also historical Crosby) because actually winning the cup doesn't matter" is a dumber argument

 

[Frank Drebin]

Like I said, your argument that "McDavid is a tier above his current generation (and also historical Crosby) because actually winning the cup doesn't matter" is a dumber argument

Let me know when you have something substantial to say.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

It’s amazing how many people talk like scoring today is so easy, any decent player can do it….where as during crosbys days, only the best scored. That’s why Jamie Benn and MSL won scoring titles in crosbys prime…

Still trying to convince people MSL + Pre-leg injury 60 goal Stamkos wouldn't dominate today huh? Not sure too many people are following you down that trail, you even lost some of the extreme posters with that one.

Cheap shots and blind side hits are as much of a problem today as they were back then. Stop trying to paint it as if Crosby came in this rugged “80s style” era, all while trying to use it as a romanticized justification for his missing time

If only there was some sort of data, like historical list of suspensions, and statements issued by the league how they are trying to crack down on this stuff to go off on. Oh wait, there is. This has been covered a ton of times on these boards, and you have been around for awhile, so at this point you are just being willfully ignorant.

 

[PainForShane]

Let me know when you have something substantial to say.

Let the rest of us know when you're able to make an argument that's not dumb.

Must be embarrassing to keep having to pretend McDavid wouldn't trade all of his individual accomplishments for an Edmonton parade

 

[Frank Drebin]

Let the rest of us know when you're able to make an argument that's not dumb.

Must be embarrassing to keep having to pretend McDavid wouldn't trade all of his individual accomplishments for an Edmonton parade

McDavid would trade all of his accomplishments for Ryan ORiellys cup. True

That doesnt' mean that ryan oReilly is a better hockey player than Connor McDavid

You see how dumb that is?

So if it doesnt work for Ryan Oreilly, what makes you think it works for Crosby? Was Crosby greater than Mario Lemieux because he won more cups?

Is Matt Murray a better goalie than Henrik Lundqvist?

 

[dukeofjive]

Lets see i forgot this one, after gretzky left the oilers they went on to win the cup with Messier as there captain, then he went on to win a cup in NY, so i guess that mean messier is the better player.

More crickets is my best guess

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Exactly - durability is a virtue in all professional sports, no matter how many times hockey fans, and hockey fans alone, try to pretend it isn't.

Durability has never been a factor in assessing a players historical ranking or skill on these boards. Orr/Lemieux wouldn't be talked about among the immortal if it was.

Crosby never missed significant time due to any cheap shots - so era has nothing to do with it.

Wrong. But the guy on your favorite team was one of the cheap shots, so I can see how your in an odd position to defend him.

Crosby missed time because he skated with his head down while not looking where he was going.

You thinking of Lindros?

Pretending missed games are not a negative is history revision.

Nobody said that. It just doesn't have any bearing on assessing the player's 'tier' unless they are missing Eric Lindros amount of games

 

[Frank Drebin]

Lets see i forgot this one, after gretzky left the oilers they went on to win the cup with Messier as there captain, then he went on to win a cup in NY, so i guess that mean messier is the better player.

More crickets is my best guess

winning the cup is the only thing that matters therefore joe mullen was superior to Gretzky from 1988 on

 

[norrisnick]

Let the rest of us know when you're able to make an argument that's not dumb.

Must be embarrassing to keep having to pretend McDavid wouldn't trade all of his individual accomplishments for an Edmonton parade

Unless you're willing to accept that Kris Draper was better than Sidney Crosby because 4 > 3, you cannot sit there and state that cups are the only things that matter.

 

[PainForShane]

McDavid would trade all of his accomplishments for Ryan ORiellys cup. True

That doesnt' mean that ryan oReilly is a better hockey player than Connor McDavid

You see how dumb that is?

So if it doesnt work for Ryan Oreilly, what makes you think it works for Crosby? Was Crosby greater than Mario Lemieux because he won more cups?

Is Matt Murray a better goalie than Henrik Lundqvist?

It works for Crosby because Sid and McD are the roughly the same tier of player. They're both the best offensive producer of their generation and have won a similar amount of individual hardware (which you showed in your post, thank you for that). Therefore the fact that Sid has won multiple cups, and McDavid hasn't (at least not yet) is obviously a key differentiator in their respective careers.

You're over here pretending over and over that leading a team to a cup (or multiple cups) is irrelevant. It is not. You can keep pretending though, I'm sure you will. Seems like a dumb viewpoint to attach yourself to / continue to argue, but what do I know.

Unless you're willing to accept that Kris Draper was better than Sidney Crosby because 4 > 3, you cannot sit there and state that cups are the only things that matter.

That's not and has never been my argument (or to my knowledge, anyone else's at least not that I've seen in this thread).

 

[GreatGonzo]

Still trying to convince people MSL + Pre-leg injury 60 goal Stamkos wouldn't dominate today huh? Not sure too many people are following you down that trail, you even lost some of the extreme posters with that one.

If only there was some sort of data, like historical list of suspensions, and statements issued by the league how they are trying to crack down on this stuff to go off on. Oh wait, there is. This has been covered a ton of times on these boards, and you have been around for awhile, so at this point you are just being willfully ignorant.

Im not the one so invested in make believe numbers. Also, I said nothing about Stamkos

What are you going on about? Facts are, they still happen in today’s game. Crosbys prime wasn’t some free for all.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Lots of posters are trying to normalize losing in this thread, which is absolutely crazy work.

Winning the cup doesn’t make you automatically better than another player, but can definitely be used as a tiebreaker when comparing 2 players when these said players bring a similar impact for their team.