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

[GreatGonzo]

The first bolded sentence isn't what I said. The second bolded sentence absolutely is what I said, it's pretty obvious to everyone you're just spouting off "raw totals" while actively not to hear any context. Seems like you meant that 2nd sentence sarcastically, that sarcasm is obviously not justified given your post history.

And also, I'm clearly not trolling nor have I been this entire time. That's pretty obvious to anyone even remotely following this conversation.

What the hell are you talking about? Is your sarcasm meter broken?….

34 assists in a Post season: an NHL record
42 points in the Post season: 3rd most behind Gretzky and Lemieux
100 assists: 4th player to achieve it(behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr)

Go ahead, add your special brand of “context” to these achievements. Can’t wait to see how idiotic they get.

Your logic: “lolz nice raw totals.” Do you even know what a “raw total” is? Because you keep using that word, but I strongly feel like you don’t even know how or why you are using it. Just further piggy backing off of other peoples posts.

Clearly these numbers are far too advanced for your limited way of thinking.

 

[PainForShane]

What the hell are you talking about? Is your sarcasm meter broken?….

34 assists in a Post season: an NHL record
42 points in the Post season: 3rd most behind Gretzky and Lemieux
100 assists: 4th player to achieve it(behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr)

Your logic: “lolz nice raw totals.” Do you even know what a “raw total” is? Because you keep using that word, but I strongly feel like you don’t even know how or why you are using it. Just further piggy backing off of other peoples posts.

Clearly these numbers are far too advanced for your limited way of thinking.

Like I said, "it's pretty obvious to everyone you're just spouting off 'raw totals' while actively choosing not to hear any context."

Lolz nice raw totals. Also, I know how to count as do most other functional humans. The fact that you can also count is not the flex that you seem to think it is.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Like I said, "it's pretty obvious to everyone you're just spouting off 'raw totals' while actively choosing not to hear any context"

Lolz nice raw totals. Also, I know how to count as do most other functional humans.

Ok, I’m all ears….whats the context behind those totals?…since I seem to be “choosing” to ignore ANY context…

What’s the context behind 34 assists in the post season? A Gretzky record that stood for 25 years…now broken. Seems odd that the NHL would hold a record for such a meaningless “raw total.”

 

[PainForShane]

Ok, I’m all ears….whats the context behind those totals?…since I seem to be “choosing” to ignore ANY context…

What’s the context behind 34 assists in the post season? A Gretzky record that stood for 25 years…now broken. Seems odd that the NHL would hold a record for such a meaningless “raw total.”

MacMac already answered these questions in depth, in direct response to this question which you already asked.

I did as well, in the conversation you and I had where you actively went out of your way to refuse to understand the terms 'clutch' and 'meangingful games.' Learn how to read.

 

[GreatGonzo]

MacMac already answered these questions in depth, in direct response to this question which you already asked.

I did as well, in the conversation you and I had where you actively went out of your way to refuse to understand the terms 'clutch' and 'meangingful games.' Learn how to read.

Im asking you…or are you not capable of answering for yourself? You need other people to do that for you? You are the one spouting off how they are just raw totals that require “context.” So please…enlighten me..

Because you have no idea what either of those terms mean you just say them and use them thinking they make you sound more intelligent than you actually are.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

What an odd point to bring up when McDavid will likely clear Ovechkin’s total within the next two seasons.

I don’t think he does. Guy has nagging injuries and is in the back half of his career. Speed falls off in your 30s.

Clearly the next handful of years are key. For those who think he is likely to repeat 2023 or what he did in Covid shortened season, sure I get why you are so giddy.

I think we get a lot more similar seasons coming up like last year, just where McDavid misses even more time, seeing as he played an extra 2 months of hockey, and the younger players like Bedard/Hughes start catching up going forward.

 

[PainForShane]

Im asking you…or are you not capable of answering for yourself? You need other people to do that for you? You are the one spouting off how they are just raw totals that require “context.” So please…enlighten me..

Because you have no idea what either of those terms mean you just say them and use them thinking they make you sound more intelligent than you actually are.

Your question has already been answered. By me actually, when we were discussing the ideas of 'clutch' and 'meaningful games' which you never even tried to figure out despite multiple asks. And also by MacMac who honestly did a better job than I did at explaining (thx MacMac). I said both of these things in my above post, which was extremely concise. You clearly didn't understand the post even though it contained few words.

Also, I'm fairly certain I'm far from the only one having a go at your posts for only including raw totals without context. You've responded to other posters before about this very thing.

***

The above two statements are why I keep telling you to learn how to read. That way you would understand the answer to your question has already been provided multiple times. In the meantime, the continued ignorance of your posts continues to be humorous. Thx for continuing to post here.

 

[GreatGonzo]

The only "definition" of clutch and meaningful that you've ever given is, and I'm paraphrasing, "the situations I say are are and the ones I say aren't aren't." Not once has any justification besides capricious decision making been given.

Remember, he stated Crosbys 1 goal and 3 points were “clutch” in the finals. How? Why? No reason….basically because it’s Crosby.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

points arent everything, personal awards isnt everything. Crosby is everything you want in a leader. he's also a proven winner.
McDavid is incredible and prob is a better player skill wise but Crosby just gets the job done, and for that reason I could never draft McDavid for Crosby. or not yet atleast. McDavid has alot of years left but until he wins a cup, I dunno how I can ever place him above Crosby

 

[norrisnick]

Sorry NorrisNick.

The above quote was in direct response to Gonzo (post 1310). Maybe you should learn how to read as well. The trivially easy to use search function is a bitch for wannabe trolls, isn't it?

***

I was asking you if you understood the relatively simple answer that you were given in a direct response to this exact question (see previous answer above). You clearly do not.

Perhaps you don't understand the term capricious decision making? Which would track...

 

[norrisnick]

Are you apologizing for never giving a real answer to your takes, even after claiming that you answered the questions?..,

Wait a second, so basically in the series against Detroit games 3 and 4 were “close” and the series was still up in the air….while for Edmonton, games 4 and 5…the series wasn’t “up in the air?” And that’s the logic you want to stick by?..

Are you truly unable to answer such a SIMPLE yes or no question? Is it really that hard for you?

About the only thread of "logic" that seems to traverse this discussion is that nothing either player actually did matters. If their team ultimately won? Clutch and meaningful play. If their team ultimately lost? Irrelevant and why are you even bothering to talk about it?

 

[PainForShane]

It’s a simple question….

And the answer was repeated in a post not even 10 minutes ago. Learn how to read.

About the only thread of "logic" that seems to traverse this discussion is that nothing either player actually did matters. If their team ultimately won? Clutch and meaningful play. If their team ultimately lost? Irrelevant and why are you even bothering to talk about it?

No, that's not the logic. That's actually the opposite of the logic.

 

[norrisnick]

No it wasn’t. Tell me, was game 4 and 5 of these past playoffs meaningful or meaningless…

It isn’t a trick question I’m sure a child could handle it as well. You seem to struggle though…

“I know you are, but what am I?!”

Edmonton lost the series. Nothing that any of their players did after game 3 has any meaning.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Edmonton lost the series. Nothing that any of their players did within has any meaning.

It’s all true. They should put a asterisk next to McDavids 42 point season with the following context..
-compiled points in meaningless games
-didn’t show up when it mattered
-didn’t make his teammates better
-didn’t carry them to victory.
-isn’t a REAL leader like Crosby

Crosbys ‘09 deserves the following next to it..
-clutch
-showed up when it mattered
-scored when it mattered
-took the toughest matchups so his team can score
-was a TRUE leader and actually won.

 

[wetcoast]

What? Obsessed with Raw totals? What does that even mean? Like, what are you talking about? Those are 2 very distinctive numbers, one of which. Is a record now….and you scoff and say, “you are so obsessed with raw totals.” As opposed to….what? You really don’t make any sense.

His playoff run is certainly up there. How is that arguable? He broke a Gretzky playoff record and won the conn smythe. What you think is or isn’t better or worst is your opinion. You have yours, I have mine. I think it’s the best playoff run we have seen in many years regardless of the outcome.

“Again with the raw todays that inflate McDavids stats”????? What the actual hell are you going on about? You sound absolutely ridiculous. He’s literally the 3RD player to reach 100 assists. Kucherov doing the same shouldn’t mean McDavids stats mean less…

You clearly don’t know what “inflated stats” means. You are making up stuff again

You tell me, is Yzerman better? You think people would say he is better? Be honest….because if you are asking that then you already sound silly.

You really enjoy finding excuses don’t you. He has 4 Lindsay’s, that’s 2nd most behind Gretzky and tied with Lemieux. Whether you agree or not, that’s impressive.

Reasonable for you is “likely” though. And we have no way of knowing if he would have reached those numbers, I know that breaks your little heart. But it’s the truth.

News alert I'm not as obsessed about numbers as some ehre and even said upthread that the reasonable amount was to knock off say 55 over a full season give or take but let's break it down shall we starting with 10-11.

I asked your detroit buddy this but he never answered probably because he knew the truth of it.

10-11 Crosby has a stat line of 41-32-34-66 which adjusted for season comes out to a line of 41-35-36-71 but let's stick to straight raw stats.

A 56 game season that he once again sustained over an 82 game season. Crosby unfortunately didn’t get that opportunity, but that’s not on McDavid. He played the games and dominated.

I apologize for the last statement. Confused you with someone else.

This sentence is all sorts of hyperbolic drivel.

Four players at some point being the definitive best player in the league, does not mean they are equal. Comparable, I guess. But it still fairly clearly goes Gretzky, Howe, Orr, Lemieux. The smallest gap is between Howe and Orr. The biggest gap between Gretzky and Howe.

Yet many have different orders to rank them even if most people have Gretzky as the #1.

McDavid is closer in all around play than Crosby is offensively.

Can you expand upon this as I think I know what you mean but not sure so want you to clarify before responding.

 

[norrisnick]

Can you expand upon this as I think I know what you mean but not sure so want you to clarify before responding.

McDavid's all-around play is closer to Crosby's all-around play, than Crosby's offense is to McDavid's offense.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Crazy that with how blessed Pittsburgh has been for talent over the years it is always coulda shoulda woulda propping up their stars. Just be glad they were as successful as they were!

Except poor Jagr who played on thin teams while getting mugged night in and night out. He’s actually underrated by many.

Edmonton would take prime Crosby and Malkin in a heartbeat over McDavid and Draisaitl if the organization really wanted to win.

Both Crosby and Malkin know (and have shown), that in order to win, they might had to sacrifice their individual production to the benefit of their team. They’ve proven it numerous times in the playoffs. The perfect example of this happened in 2016 when Crosby was playing with rookie Sheary and Patric Hornqvist, who was arguably the 8th best forward on the team at the time (behind Crosby, Malkin, Bonino, Hagelin, Kessel, Rust and Sheary). Malkin was playing with the corpse of Chris Kunitz and rookie Bryan Rust on his line, while the HBK line could benefit of the matchup advantage to destroy the opposition. As a result, Crosby’s and Malkin’s totals were lower, because of the way Pittsburgh could distribute the production more evenly among the first 3 lines. Then, in 2017, when Crosby had a better offensive player on his line in rookie Guentzel, his numbers magically improved. Same thing happened with Malkin when Kessel got put on his line. I won’t spend much time talking about the 2009 team, as they were just otherworldly, by deploying the same strategy. It is still arguably to this day the biggest carry job ever done by 2 players in NHL history (excl. Gretzky-led teams).

McDavid has had generally better players on his line, often times playing with Draisaitl at ES to inflate his totals, to the overall detriment of his team. It’s not necessarily his fault, but that is something he could propose to his coach instead of continuing to inflate his totals, playing with RNH, Hyman and sometimes Draisaitl (and letting the other lines hang up to dry). You know, something a good leader would do . Maybe if McDavid and Draisaitl needed less help on their lines, Edmonton could invest in potent goaltending, some trusted defensemans, or better depth players to help them in the playoffs…

There’s no “shoulda”, “woulda”, “coulda” here. Just two guys who had the team first mentality from the start, who showed what it took (multiple times) to be able to lift the big trophy.

 

[norrisnick]

I quoted an answer to this in post 1617, you already responded to it.

And yes, a child would certainly understand that I answered this question already. Multiple times in fact.

***



That's not what I said. There you are arguing against imaginary viewpoints again.

I'm going to dance all around the words that clearly define exactly what I mean to say, but I'm never going to actually say those words because that would make me sound pretty silly.

 

[PainForShane]

This?…

“No, that's not what I said. I said the Pittsburgh series was close meaning in gms 3 and 4 ie the outcome of the series was still in doubt (which the Edm series was not in gms 4 and 5). You bolded this statement, I'm assuming you read the statement you bolded.”

So yes? You think those games were meaningless?

quoting someone who didn’t even answer the question isn’t answering the question. You really have a hard to grasping basic concept huh?

I already know what you are going to rebuttal with, “uhhh it’s actually YOU who can’t grasp basic concepts!”

So yes. I think those games were meaningless (gms 4 and 5 of the 2024 SCF when Edm was already down 3-0), because the outcome of the series was not in doubt at that point.

Took you long enough

***

I'm going to dance all around the words that clearly define exactly what I mean to say, but I'm never going to actually say those words because that would make me sound pretty silly.

I said my point multiple times. You just didn't understand it and have been summarizing my words in a way that twists their meaning into something I didn't actually say. You've been doing this all thread.

Not my problem or responsibility.

 

[wetcoast]

crosby was ppg for the first 20 games that year

No he wasn't.

In 10-11 for the first 20 games he had 13 goals and 16 assists.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I asked you multiple times what I meant by the term 'meaningful games.' This was after I explained it, by the way.

You never answered my question despite multiple asks. Do you know, or do you want to guess at what this term means in the context of a 7-game series (there's that term again, 'context').

It's not my responsibility to solve the world's ignorance.

Stanley cup finals are meaningful games
Elimination games are meaningful games
It’s not a hard concept, for most of us.

yet you continue to dodge and weave.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I also find it interesting that Crosby can be mediocre in the playoffs, yet his team still wins….and he still gets credit for it. But McDavid? He didn’t score enough…do enough…or lead enough to get it done.

I mean, I guess McDavid could try doing LESS in the playoffs -- maybe that is the key after all?

 

[Video Nasty]

What was Crosby’s pace through 40 games based off the 32 goals and 33 assists for 65 points he had through 38 games in 2010-2011?

 

[GreatGonzo]

You know what's funny? You didn't even use google correctly. lmfao

View attachment 897052

“Cuts off the definition I sent.”

You really thought you had something There?

I mean, I guess McDavid could try doing LESS in the playoffs -- maybe that is the key after all?

he scores points? Didn’t score enough
He doesn’t score points? Didn’t score enough
His team doesn’t score? Doesn’t make them better
His team does score? Can’t do it himself.
He plays well but team loses? Not a good leader
He plays poorly but his team wins? Can’t play when it matters.

Either way, he loses according to many.

 

[wetcoast]

The Penguins have a very good winning record during the hundreds of games that Crosby has missed. They generally go from .620 to .720 in extended periods without Crosby.

You just love this stat because it includes his rookie season where the Penguins were a a very old and not so good team.

I guess if Crosby had never played on the Pens they would have won more SC's as well right?

But just like Mark Twain some people love lies, damn lies and statistics.

It has generally been a far better team around Crosby.

Generally.....so meaning full eh?

I mean what can anyone conclude around that last statement and the first one?

Crosby's defensive statistics over the course of his career are nowhere near top half of the NHL. He isn't asked to do those things (65%+ career offensive zone starts and 24 seconds PK per game - 12 seconds in the playoffs, but actually those are both misleading as Crosby hops over the boards at the end of every PK after the puck is cleared), nor should he be.

Yes more selective cherry-picking here because guys like datsyuk played so much PK time as well during his Selke years....well actually he didn't.

People can see that generally (see I like your new word too) that Crosby has been elite defensively among top point producing forwards other time.

Here is some video evidence that displays some of this.

All apologies that this and what most people can see runs counter to your narrative which seems to not exist outside of your imagination.