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

[Grifter3511]

No one has argued this idea during this thread, nor does anyone believe it.

You are still being intellectually dishonest.

Nope. Kunitz and Dupuis were all cast offs who barely remembered how to skate. Then they met up with Crosby who sat with them during practices, kept them late after practices for one on one tutelage, and by his greatness and mentorship he managed to turn them into slightly better players than they were previously.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Nope. Kunitz and Dupuis were all cast offs who barely remembered how to skate. Then they met up with Crosby who sat with them during practices, kept them late after practices for one on one tutelage, and by his greatness and mentorship he managed to turn them into slightly better players than they were previously.

I heard he even did their taxes for them and babysits their dogs whenever they feel a need to get away. That’s true leadership.

 

[PainForShane]

Nope. Kunitz and Dupuis were all cast offs who barely remembered how to skate. Then they met up with Crosby who sat with them during practices, kept them late after practices for one on one tutelage, and by his greatness and mentorship he managed to turn them into slightly better players than they were previously.

More dishonesty. No one is or has been arguing anything close to this level of nonsense

 

[Grifter3511]

I heard he even did their taxes for them and babysits their dogs whenever they feel a need to get away. That’s true leadership.

Didn't he father their children for them?

 

[tarheelhockey]

132 points + a 15% increase in scoring is 152 points. And that's not even getting into how top line players have disproportionately benefited from the scoring increase. Crosby's points per game leads have been more impressive than McDavid's.

Where are you getting 132 points? Crosby’s career high is 120.

As I said above, there’s only so much you can do with samples of a half-season or less. You can’t just assume that his pace was sustainable in those fractional seasons.

Why can’t we assume that? Because, for example, Crosby had 37 points in 22 games in 2009-10. That 138-point pace was the best of his entire career.

Meanwhile, McDavid had 42 points in his first 22 games of 2020-21. If we stop him there, he’s pacing for a 157-point season, which would remain his career high to this day. So how did that season actually turn out? Well, he finished with 123 points after his numbers came back down to norms in the second half of the season. 123 points is still a very good season (again, higher than Crosby’s career high) but it’s not anything like 157. We would be foolish to give him credit for a 157-point season based on his pace in October and November.

Like I said above, Crosby subjectively feels like we would have peaked as a 120-point guy if he had better luck with his health. Adjusting for leaguewide scoring rates gets him closer to McDavid’s peak, leaving a gap of around 20 points. That’s still quite a lot… we all know the difference between a 40 and 60 point scorer, 60 and 80, 80 and 100. That’s not the kind of gap that gets completely washed out with better defense and grit.

One other factor that confounds the efforts at era adjustment, is that in the early 2010s the game was very well structured for a Sidney Crosby to be successful in the early 2010s, and then in the early 2020s it was very well structured for a Connor McDavid to be successful. I doubt very much that they’d have thrived as much if they swapped eras.

And Kucherov scoring 144 pts McDavid's totals into perspective, as he's clearly a worse player than Crosby, Ovechkin, or Malkin were.

Kucherov already had a 128-point season prior to that, exceeding Crosby’s actual career high and approximating Crosby’s career high if we adjust for era.

That would be his fourth 100-point season, and if not for COVID he would almost certainly have hit 6 (yes, making the same deadly assumptions about pace, but look at the numbers… it was pretty clear he would hit 100 both times). That would have given him a career scoring profile that looks an awful lot like Crosby’s, whether that feels intuitive or not.

It’s a different thread, but we need to appreciate Kucherov a bit more. He is in fact a really high-end scorer even among the HHOF crowd.

You think his 19 year old season was his peak?

It was his actual scoring peak, and that isn’t debatable.

 

[GreatGonzo]

More dishonesty. No one is or has been arguing anything close to this level of nonsense

It’s called a joke…

 

[admiralcadillac]

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.

When you’re comparing how good players are and using point totals it’s obviously relevant. People want to point to totals without contextualizing how good the player was when he was playing.

 

[Grifter3511]

It’s called a joke…

Dude fills this thread with ridiculously subjective and qualitative takes, and can't handle a little hyperbole thrown back.

He needs to channel his inner Crosby and rise above.

 

[PainForShane]

Dude fills this thread with ridiculously subjective and qualitative takes, and can't handle a little hyperbole thrown back.

He needs to channel his inner Crosby and rise above.

Your hyperbole and actual arguments are extremely similar. Hard to tell where one ends and the other begins

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Or they think McDavid is better.

Claiming McDavid is better is not the problem. To me, on his way to have a better career on an individual basis than Crosby.

I’ve been reading these boards for long enough to know that some of the posters arguing for McDavid are just here to bring down Crosby, as they were the same people to bring him down in multiple comparisons including Crosby since like 2015 (with Ovechkin, or any other player in particular).

I recognize the usernames, which is why I don’t really engage with them anymore. Their analysis constantly reeks of bias when it comes to Crosby and there is absolutely no point in arguing with them as they always use the same broken narratives to bring him down in every thread with a well known agenda behind it while ignoring anything else you say. It’s like a Crosby police circle jerk. I don’t see the same energy from these posters in Ovechkin or McDavid threads when someone slightly overrates them. I wonder why.

Winning a lot and being at the top for ~20 years will do that to ya. Crosby did both.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Your hyperbole and actual arguments are extremely similar. Hard to tell where one ends and the other begins

Bro it was a joke. No need to back peddle just because it flew over your head.

 

[Grifter3511]

Your hyperbole and actual arguments are extremely similar. Hard to tell where one ends and the other begins

Really? I thought you had it figured out. You don't respond to any of my actual argument, but only to my hyperbole, so I assumed you didn't have a rebuttal to my actual point (I have only had one point this entire time).

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yeah but he was on pace for 132 points as well. His peak production was the years he was injured.

I missed this comment at the time, but please see my reply a few posts above. Projecting a 22-game season into an 82-game pace is really not a valid argument when it comes to NHL scoring patterns.

 

[pi314]

Neither of them are in the Mario tier.

Mario wouldn’t lose a scoring title in his prime to 2 non-Gretzky players.

That’s with a bad back and cancer.

 

[pi314]

I missed this comment at the time, but please see my reply a few posts above. Projecting a 22-game season into an 82-game pace is really not a valid argument when it comes to NHL scoring patterns.

He did the same pace over multiple seasons.

Are people really that disingenuous to pretend Crosby would not have produced in his best years if he wasn’t Steckeled?

He’s produced for 20 years.

 

[Grifter3511]

He did the same pace over multiple seasons.

Are people really that disingenuous to pretend Crosby would not have produced in his best years if he wasn’t Steckeled?

He’s produced for 20 years.

He would still produce, but unless a player gets off to a rough start, almost EVERY player's pace slows down over the season. Between the length of the season, teams tightening up on defense as the season goes on, general wear and tear, etc. Maybe he maintains his pace all season. It's possible. But it's also just as possible that his pace slows, even just a little. Which is why people push back when others try to argue with pure speculation.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

He did the same pace over multiple seasons.

Are people really that disingenuous to pretend Crosby would not have produced in his best years if he wasn’t Steckeled?

He’s produced for 20 years.

But he was Steckeled, it's part of the game.

Even if you agree with the fact that Crosby was on pace to be even better than he was and dominate scoring races , he didn't do it.

McDavid is doing exactly what we thought Sid would have done if he didn't get hurt lol. But he's actually doing it in front of our eyes for full seasons


The guy has 5 art rosses at 27 years old , what are we even talking about.

Keep in mind I'm sure Sid doesn't mind people having McDavid over him , he's got 3 cups and is a legend in his own right. Nobody is putting Crosby down saying McDavid is better.


If McDavid was a loser in the playoffs you would have an argument but its a team game and he's been the best player in the playoffs since Lemieux and Gretzky like what are we actually even talking about here

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Where are you getting 132 points? Crosby’s career high is 120.

As I said above, there’s only so much you can do with samples of a half-season or less. You can’t just assume that his pace was sustainable in those fractional seasons.

Why can’t we assume that? Because, for example, Crosby had 37 points in 22 games in 2009-10. That 138-point pace was the best of his entire career.

Meanwhile, McDavid had 42 points in his first 22 games of 2020-21. If we stop him there, he’s pacing for a 157-point season, which would remain his career high to this day. So how did that season actually turn out? Well, he finished with 123 points after his numbers came back down to norms in the second half of the season. 123 points is still a very good season (again, higher than Crosby’s career high) but it’s not anything like 157. We would be foolish to give him credit for a 157-point season based on his pace in October and November.

Like I said above, Crosby subjectively feels like we would have peaked as a 120-point guy if he had better luck with his health. Adjusting for leaguewide scoring rates gets him closer to McDavid’s peak, leaving a gap of around 20 points. That’s still quite a lot… we all know the difference between a 40 and 60 point scorer, 60 and 80, 80 and 100. That’s not the kind of gap that gets completely washed out with better defense and grit.

One other factor that confounds the efforts at era adjustment, is that in the early 2010s the game was very well structured for a Sidney Crosby to be successful in the early 2010s, and then in the early 2020s it was very well structured for a Connor McDavid to be successful. I doubt very much that they’d have thrived as much if they swapped eras.



Kucherov already had a 128-point season prior to that, exceeding Crosby’s actual career high and approximating Crosby’s career high if we adjust for era.

That would be his fourth 100-point season, and if not for COVID he would almost certainly have hit 6 (yes, making the same deadly assumptions about pace, but look at the numbers… it was pretty clear he would hit 100 both times). That would have given him a career scoring profile that looks an awful lot like Crosby’s, whether that feels intuitive or not.

It’s a different thread, but we need to appreciate Kucherov a bit more. He is in fact a really high-end scorer even among the HHOF crowd.



It was his actual scoring peak, and that isn’t debatable.

The post you quoted said 132, and Crosby played at a 133 point have from 2010-11 to 12-13, albeit over only 99 games (more than a full season for those unaware).

Kucherov's production only jumped once goalie equipment shrunk, he was a sub 100 point player before that

Claiming McDavid is better is not the problem. To me, on his way to have a better career on an individual basis than Crosby.

I’ve been reading these boards for long enough to know that some of the posters arguing for McDavid are just here to bring down Crosby, as they were the same people to bring him down in multiple comparisons including Crosby since like 2015 (with Ovechkin, or any other player in particular).

I recognize the usernames, which is why I don’t really engage with them anymore. Their analysis constantly reeks of bias when it comes to Crosby and there is absolutely no point in arguing with them as they always use the same broken narratives to bring him down in every thread with a well known agenda behind it while ignoring anything else you say. It’s like a Crosby police circle jerk. I don’t see the same energy from these posters in Ovechkin or McDavid threads when someone slightly overrates them. I wonder why.

Winning a lot and being at the top for ~20 years will do that to ya. Crosby did both.

It's also pretty funny that @BraveCanadian is laughing at your post since I'm pretty sure he hasn't watched an NHL game since Gretzky retired.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

He did the same pace over multiple seasons.

Are people really that disingenuous to pretend Crosby would not have produced in his best years if he wasn’t Steckeled?

He’s produced for 20 years.

Crosby led the league in ppg in 2010-11. And the next year 11-12. And the next year 12-13. And the next year 13-14. And the next year 14-15. And people are thinking he's lucky or wouldn't have kept up the pace in the middle of his prime? Sorry that is impressively ignorant.

Honestly I think the biggest reason that Crosby gets downplayed is the way he plays isn't as jaw dropping as a McDavid or an Ovechkin, who even a casual fan can recognize their ability. So people can't understand why Crosby's so successful because they don't understand the sport well enough to recognize his IQ or what he's doing on the ice.

He would still produce, but unless a player gets off to a rough start, almost EVERY player's pace slows down over the season. Between the length of the season, teams tightening up on defense as the season goes on, general wear and tear, etc. Maybe he maintains his pace all season. It's possible. But it's also just as possible that his pace slows, even just a little. Which is why people push back when others try to argue with pure speculation.

Crosby had a poor start in 2010-11 and his ppg was steadily increasing as the season went on. And I don't know that it's true that almost every player's place slows down over the season. You're going to have to show your work here.

 

[Grifter3511]

Crosby had a poor start in 2010-11 and his ppg was steadily increasing as the season went on. And I don't know that it's true that almost every player's place slows down over the season. You're going to have to show your work here.

Sorry man, I just don't care enough to do so. If I'm wrong (that players who start out strong often drop off slightly as the season goes on) I'll gladly admit it, but I can't be bothered to prove it to you.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Claiming McDavid is better is not the problem. To me, on his way to have a better career on an individual basis than Crosby.

I’ve been reading these boards for long enough to know that some of the posters arguing for McDavid are just here to bring down Crosby, as they were the same people to bring him down in multiple comparisons including Crosby since like 2015 (with Ovechkin, or any other player in particular).

I recognize the usernames, which is why I don’t really engage with them anymore. Their analysis constantly reeks of bias when it comes to Crosby and there is absolutely no point in arguing with them as they always use the same broken narratives to bring him down in every thread with a well known agenda behind it while ignoring anything else you say. It’s like a Crosby police circle jerk. I don’t see the same energy from these posters in Ovechkin or McDavid threads when someone slightly overrates them. I wonder why.

Winning a lot and being at the top for ~20 years will do that to ya. Crosby did both.

You have to notice some posters doing the same thing with McDavid as what happened to Crosby. Instead of Flyer, Wing and Ranger fans crapping on Crosby we have Canuck/Leaf/Calgary and now Penguins/Crosby fans trying to diminish what McDavid has done.

The thing is, it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter that posters tried to argue that Toews was on the same level as Crosby, or that Crosby was not the best player on his own team. Those comments just look dumb when looking back on them.

Just like the comments that say the best offensive playoff performer since Mario Lemieux is somehow not good enough to win a cup not only look stupid today, but will look even stupider in the future looking back.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Crosby likely finished with 1800+ points and a chance of having the 4th most points all time. That’s with missing 140ish games of his prime.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Crosby had a poor start in 2010-11 and his ppg was steadily increasing as the season went on. And I don't know that it's true that almost every player's place slows down over the season. You're going to have to show your work here.

I don't think what he said was precise - that pace typically goes down over a season.

What I think can be shown is that 82 games is a grind, and players regularly deal with nagging injuries. -That is part of NHL life.

 

[Regal]

He would still produce, but unless a player gets off to a rough start, almost EVERY player's pace slows down over the season. Between the length of the season, teams tightening up on defense as the season goes on, general wear and tear, etc. Maybe he maintains his pace all season. It's possible. But it's also just as possible that his pace slows, even just a little. Which is why people push back when others try to argue with pure speculation.

That’s not true or scoring would go down significantly throughout the season. Every player is more likely to regress to his mean the more games he plays, whether that’s positively or negatively over the course of a season. It’s likely Crosby’s pace goes down in his injured years because it was higher than his usual production but even with normal regression he’s still likely leading the league in scoring

 

[Regal]

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.

120 is basically in line with his actual pace (1.47) for that time period (since 13-14 brings the numbers down a bit). Over those 4 years, the league average GPG was 2.68. Over the past 4 years, McDavid has been on a 143 pace with a league average GPG of 3.07. Those 120 points adjust to 137 in McDavid’s environment. It’s an advantage for McDavid, but it’s not large. Unless you mean that 120 would be the peak season not the average of those years. That would be a decent advantage for McDavid given the 153 point year. But I think at the very least it’s likely he’d pace for 120 over all three of 10-11 to 12-13.