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

[admiralcadillac]

On pace =/= actual production…

Crosby is always “on pace” when it comes to his peak and it over glorifies his play all while many of his lovers adore using partial seasons because they get to use the magical stats that make him appear better than he was.

Oh come on lol

 

[tabness]

so anyone change their mind yet lol?

 

[norrisnick]

Kucherov doesn’t come close to 144 points in the 2010-2014 seasons.

And neither did Crosby.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

The funniest thing in this thread (at least in the recent pages) is that most of the people who advocate for McDavid over Crosby don’t even care about McDavid that much, they just hate Crosby with a passion and are just here to tear him down

 

[Regal]

And neither did Crosby.

That was literally what was being discussed. That comparing Crosby’s lower numbers at his best with Kucherov’s numbers this year isn’t a good measure given the large difference in scoring environments.

 

[J bo Jeans]

View attachment 895699

Seen this graph a lot on x and insta lately. Its a total load of shit.

You don't get points for games you never played. Short high scoring sample sizes are a huge benefit to Crosby here.

 

[BraveCanadian]

The funniest thing in this thread (at least in the recent pages) is that most of the people who advocate for McDavid over Crosby don’t even care about McDavid that much, they just hate Crosby with a passion and are just here to tear him down

Or, you know, they have eyes and have looked at the numbers.

Crosby was the best of his generation but people were pumping his tires pretty hard for the past decade and now McDavid puts a lot of that into perspective.

 

[Video Nasty]

View attachment 895699

I’ve seen this posted over and over, and just shake my head at the pass Crosby is given.

The guy had a 25 game hot streak in 2010-2011, preceded by 15 points in 13 games, and broken by two scoreless games before the injury. He had 12 points in his first 8 games of 2011-2012. He played 36 of 48 games in 2012-2013. These sample sizes are very small and far out of his norm when he actually played full or close to full seasons.

He is then given credit in that chart for three 140-150 point seasons, a 70 goal campaign, and two 100 assist seasons. This guy has a whopping two seasons of more 105 or more points. He led the league in assists once. He led in goals twice. He led in points twice.

And you guys just eat up this slop like it is fact.

His 99 game sample during those three seasons is propped up heavily by a 25 game unsustainable heater. Get over it already.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

Well that's just like, you know, your opinion, man. Pretty coincidental timing that hockey matured right when Lemieux was in his prime, eh?

We've been over the whole "more modern players are bionic superheroes" argument 10,000 times on the boards here. It doesn't have any logical basis when you see the career spans of top players.

The thing is, hockey has become vastly more exclusive in the past few decades, and there is no evidence that there is a larger talent pool on a per-team basis now than there was decades ago. A bunch of countries send less players to the NHL than they did in the 90s.

Now, even *if* hockey became a global sport and everyone was hockey mad - that still doesn't guarantee that the specific circumstances and development that lead to players like a Morenz, Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux or McDavid will equally create newer better players.

This isn't a factory production line.

For some human endeavors it seems like creativity and genius tends to cluster in small areas that foster it and therefore it isn't a function of pure numbers, at all.

This just reads as Canadian essentialism. That Canadians are special and would still produce the most dominant players if it was a global sport. Sorry, I don't buy it.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Oh come on lol

Oh come on? As if what I said isn’t a fact?

This has been the usual argument lately

Crosby
-“on pace” is the same as raw numbers
-132 point PACE>153 point total
-lower scoring environment
-played in a more competitive era in terms of talent
-lesser teammates
-makes the team around him better
-had to deal with obstruction and cheap shots(lol)
-he’s a “winner.” Enough said
-defense

McDavid
-plays in a higher scoring environment so his stats aren’t as impressive
-all offense, no defense
-has had better linemates
-doesn’t make the players around him better
-plays in a “softer” league
-can’t “lead” his team anywhere
-isn’t a true “winner” or “leader.”
-doesn’t show up when it matters the most

The funniest thing in this thread (at least in the recent pages) is that most of the people who advocate for McDavid over Crosby don’t even care about McDavid that much, they just hate Crosby with a passion and are just here to tear him down

The irony

 

[JaegerDice]

Oh come on? As if what I said isn’t a fact?

This has been the usual argument lately

Crosby
-“on pace” is the same as raw numbers
-132 point PACE>153 point total
-lower scoring environment
-played in a more competitive era in terms of talent
-lesser teammates
-makes the team around him better
-had to deal with obstruction and cheap shots(lol)
-he’s a “winner.” Enough said
-defense

McDavid
-plays in a higher scoring environment so his stats aren’t as impressive
-all offense, no defense
-has had better linemates
-doesn’t make the players around him better
-plays in a “softer” league
-can’t “lead” his team anywhere
-isn’t a true “winner” or “leader.”
-doesn’t show up when it matters the most


The irony

I don't necessarily agree with this position, but it IS kinda funny seeing #TeamCrosby use several of the same arguments that they criticized Toews supporters for using in the 2010s.

Ultimately, the arguments remain strong. Using raw point totals devoid of league averages, QoC, QoT, deployment, relative on-ice impact, etc is a silly measure of overall quality. It’s like measuring the quality of a car by its top speed and nothing else. Lunacy.

At the end of the day, I do think McDavid is better than Crosby, just as Crosby was better than Toews. But to say he’s a tier better because of ‘duuuur, POINTS!’ devoid of context is just as asinine as it was in 2015. Right answer for the wrong reason.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The funniest thing in this thread (at least in the recent pages) is that most of the people who advocate for McDavid over Crosby don’t even care about McDavid that much, they just hate Crosby with a passion and are just here to tear him down

Or they think McDavid is better.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I don't necessarily agree with this position, but it IS kinda funny seeing #TeamCrosby use several of the same arguments that they criticized Toews supporters for using in the 2010s.

Ultimately, the arguments remain strong. Using raw point totals devoid of league averages, QoC, QoT, deployment, relative on-ice impact, etc is a silly measure of overall quality. It’s like measuring the quality of a car by its top speed and nothing else. Lunacy.

At the end of the day, I do think McDavid is better than Crosby, just as Crosby was better than Toews. But to say he’s a tier better because of ‘duuuur, POINTS!’ devoid of context is just as asinine as it was in 2015. Right answer for the wrong reason.

I find the most interesting part to be the amount of “context” that Crosby fans like to dig up and/or use that isn’t really context, but a series of excuses as to why Crosby didn’t achieve this/that

 

[admiralcadillac]

Oh come on? As if what I said isn’t a fact?

This has been the usual argument lately

Crosby
-“on pace” is the same as raw numbers
-132 point PACE>153 point total
-lower scoring environment
-played in a more competitive era in terms of talent
-lesser teammates
-makes the team around him better
-had to deal with obstruction and cheap shots(lol)
-he’s a “winner.” Enough said
-defense

McDavid
-plays in a higher scoring environment so his stats aren’t as impressive
-all offense, no defense
-has had better linemates
-doesn’t make the players around him better
-plays in a “softer” league
-can’t “lead” his team anywhere
-isn’t a true “winner” or “leader.”
-doesn’t show up when it matters the most


The irony

I’m sure the year he got 66 points in 41 games he would’ve stopped producing as of game 42, as that appears to be your argument.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Went with "McDavid is better but they're comparable players" option. They've had different career paths due to injuries and a HUGE increase in league wide scoring. Crosby was a supreme player, we just didn't get to see his absolute best be sustained for very long.

He played 99 games when he was 23, 24, and 25 years old. That's a major chunk to take out of a player's prime. If it's not fair to extrapolate specific numbers out of that that's fine, but the eye test showed me at least the level of domination and talent Crosby had is very comparable to what we're seeing now from McDavid. There's not a whole tier of separation between them.

I find the most interesting part to be the amount of “context” that Crosby fans like to dig up and/or use that isn’t really context, but a series of excuses as to why Crosby didn’t achieve this/that

McDavid will get the same treatment to explain his lack of Cups i'm sure.

 

[BraveCanadian]

This just reads as Canadian essentialism. That Canadians are special and would still produce the most dominant players if it was a global sport. Sorry, I don't buy it.

If that is your takeaway, I suggest you read more carefully.

 

[Video Nasty]

I’m sure the year he got 66 points in 41 games he would’ve stopped producing as of game 42, as that appears to be your argument.

He had 65 points through 38 games. Your precious pace would tell us that he should have had 68 points through 40 games before the concussion. Nope. He had 65. Pace doesn’t mean jack unless you’re Gretzky, Lemieux, and in more recent times, McDavid (76 points in first 41 games of 2022-2023 and 77 points in last 41 games).

 

[JaegerDice]

I find the most interesting part to be the amount of “context” that Crosby fans like to dig up and/or use that isn’t really context, but a series of excuses as to why Crosby didn’t achieve this/that

It’s not that different than the ‘Toews coulda scored X points if he was deployed differently’ arguments.

Context matters, but any context argument can be taken too far, beyond the point of credulity.

Its probably true that if you drop peak Crosby into today’s NHL, he scores more than he did. Likewise, you drop peak McDavid into 2010, he probably scores less than he is now. Ultimately, I still think McDavid is more impactful either way, Im just looking beyond the hockey card numbers to reach that conclusion.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I’m sure the year he got 66 points in 41 games he would’ve stopped producing as of game 42, as that appears to be your argument.

You got that from my statement? That’s not at all what I said or even implied, but sure…whatever makes you feel better.

So let’s just pretend like he actually hit 132 points with 60+ goals as if he ACTUALLY achieved those totals, seems legit…

 

[Frank Drebin]

I’m sure the year he got 66 points in 41 games he would’ve stopped producing as of game 42, as that appears to be your argument.

Not stopped producing, but likely at a lower rate.

But its hard to say, because it didn't happen.

Would McDavid have scored 50 points in 2022 playoffs if the Oilers made the finals? Useless to speculate because it didn't happen.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Not stopped producing, but likely at a lower rate.

But its hard to say, because it didn't happen.

Would McDavid have scored 50 points in 2022 playoffs if the Oilers made the finals? Useless to speculate because it didn't happen.

BUT we should pretend like he would have hit 50 points…

 

[daver]

I have plenty of respect for Crosby’s abilities, but a 120 point peak and a 153 point peak are not the same tier of offensive production. Trends in scoring rates don’t explain that near-30% difference.

You think his 19 year old season was his peak?

 

[Frank Drebin]

McDavid will get the same treatment to explain his lack of Cups i'm sure.

No context required to explain his lack of cups to date.

Any impartial fan who has followed the league knows that he hasn't been put exactly in a position to win.

In fact, this is the only the 3rd year of 9 years in the league that McDavid has actually played for a team that finished in the top third of the league standings. 10th place overall or better. Zero top 5 teams to date. Managed to get to round 2 twice, third round once and cup finals the fourth time.

Crosby played on top ten teams 12 times, 6 of those times were with top 5 teams league wide. Ironically 2 of those top 5 seasons were when he missed major time to injury.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You think his 19 year old season was his peak?

Funny enough is 19 year old Crosby arguably had a better half season than peak Crosby did..

 

[tarheelhockey]

Kucherov doesn’t come close to 144 points in the 2010-2014 seasons. You’re really underrating the huge difference in scoring levels. 132 points in 2010-11 would be the equivalent of 149 points today just adjusted based on league GPG. Crosby’s PPG dominance over his peers from 2010-11 to 2013-14 is actually better than McDavid’s over the past 4 years.

2010-2014
Crosby 1.47
Malkin 1.20
Stamkos 1.14
St.Louis 1.05
Giroux 1.05

2020-2024
McDavid 1.74
Kucherov 1.55
MacKinnon 1.52
Draisaitl 1.44
Panarin 1.30

The difference obviously is that competition changes a bit year to year and he didn’t play enough games to suggest it was sustainable. But even if we give him only 1 point per game for the 115 games he missed in that time frame, which is extremely unlikely considering he has a 1.25 PPG for his career, we’d still be looking at a situation where he was well above his peers at a 1.29 PPG (nearly a quarter of a point per game over 4th place).

McDavid’s proved himself over full seasons and he looks like he’s going to be dominant for longer, but in terms of per game production there isn’t a huge gap between them over their first 9 years.

You’ve already noted this in the second paragraph, but just to emphasize — I really question whether those adjustments are appropriate given the very small number of games he played. Every year we have the “McDavid/Crosby/Matthews/Rando on pace to crush historic records” thread by Christmastime. And every year the numbers settle to historic norms by April.

The 1.29 adjustment is probably too much in the other direction, as that would have him a 106-point player. Subjectively, at his very best and assuming health had been on his side, he “felt” like more of a 120 point guy in that lower-scoring environment. That would still era-adjust to quite a bit lower than where McDavid has been 2021-24.