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

[norrisnick]

Yes. Being down 3-0 means the outcome of the series is not in doubt. I have repeated this however many times, you're the one who apparently needs a gold sticker for finally being able to repeat this idea after however many times it's been told to you. It's not my gold sticker, it's yours.

Congratulations on your gold star! May it be the first of many.

To answer your follow on question... well, that's already been answered as well in the exact post you just quoted. Let's see if you can get another gold star.

And this here exactly is why you've been dancing around saying the actual words.

 

[BraveCanadian]

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.

Don't worry, just like with every other player if/when McDavid gets a ring he'll be a clutch time horse that you attach your wagon to and he can drag your team to a win.. and retroactively he always was!

 

[wetcoast]

Crosby being a defensive dynamo is the biggest propaganda piece thrown around in the last 15 years since the USSR started producing Pravda.

User name is very ironic for the comment eh?

 

[GreatGonzo]

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.



Generally.....so meaning full eh?

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


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.

Do you always feel a need to deflect from certain points in order to answer questions?

“Crosby doesn’t PK…”
“WELL ITS NOT LIKE DATSYUK DID!!”

 

[Golden_Jet]

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

not following, Malkin wasn’t in the league in Crosby’s rookie season, and Crosby missed one game that year.
So how does Malkin not in the league affect, that Pens have a better record when Crosby is out and Malkin is in.

 

[PainForShane]

“Cuts off the definition I sent.”

You really thought you had something There?

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.

Yes. The top definition of a word is the definition most commonly used, everyone knows this. The fact that you ignored the first definition in favor of the second one (which didn't even apply in this case) -- and then pretended that implied I didn't know what "in doubt" meant says more about your own lack of integrity than anything else. You're not fooling anyone.



All right I really do have to go. Please continue to post dishonestly while repeatedly calling out your own inability to understand basic things (incl repeatedly asking for clarification wrt basic concepts that have already been stated in direct response to your prior questions). I really do find it amusing and I'm sure I'm not the only one who does. Thx!

 

[wetcoast]

6.9% higher from 36, is 38.5 points,
Do I need to correct all the math in here.

Why are we discussing Malkin’s points in 09, vs Crosby’s 31 points.

Just wondering are you comparing the 6.9% difference in regular season scoring or playoff scoring for the 2 years?

not following, Malkin wasn’t in the league in Crosby’s rookie season, and Crosby missed one game that year.
So how does Malkin not in the league affect, that Pens have a better record when Crosby is out and Malkin is in.

The statistic is distorted because of Crosby's rookie season where his team had a .354% and it's also has people drawing conclusions that simply aren't there.

It's a simple ploy being used by simple people who are sometimes not being intellectually honest.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Yes. The top definition of a word is the definition most commonly used, everyone knows this. The fact that you ignored the first definition in favor of the second one (which didn't even apply in this case) -- and then pretended that implied I didn't know what "in doubt" meant says more about your own lack of integrity than anything else. You're not fooling anyone.



All right I really do have to go. Please continue to post dishonestly while repeatedly calling out your own inability to understand basic things (incl repeatedly asking for clarification wrt basic concepts) -- I really do find it amusing and I'm sure I'm not the only one who does. Thx!

There’s nothing separating the two definitions…you are quite literally being ridiculous. In order to be “in doubt” of something, you must be uncertain of the outcome. To have questions about it is in fact, having “doubt.”

Again, you really thought you had something. Ultimately it just shows how grade school level your vocabulary is.

The irony….feel free to quote anywhere I was “dishonest” or didn’t have ability to understand “basic things.” Just more words you love throwing against a wall because it makes you feel special.

Just wondering are you comparing the 6.9% difference in regular season scoring or playoff scoring for the 2 years?


The statistic is distorted because of Crosby's rookie season where his team had a .354% and it's also has people drawing conclusions that simply aren't there.

It's a simple ploy being used by simple people who are sometimes not being intellectually honest.

should Malkins “adjusted” point totals be taken with the same seriousness as McDavids 42 points?

 

[wetcoast]

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

That's what I thought and most people would disagree with this statment.

After all we already have that graph for their first 9 years adjusted, they are pretty close offensively, albeit McDavid has the slightly larger sample size.

But maybe you are talking about last season?

 

[pi314]

not following, Malkin wasn’t in the league in Crosby’s rookie season, and Crosby missed one game that year.
So how does Malkin not in the league affect, that Pens have a better record when Crosby is out and Malkin is in.

The Penguins had multiple seasons with the highest man games lost.

There is no with and without Crosby stat. Not in reality.

When you have 8 to 10 guys going in and out of the lineup for 2 months...

...you're not measuring the impact of just one guy.

That's impossible.

 

[BraveCanadian]

should Malkins “adjusted” point totals be taken with the same seriousness as McDavids 42 points?

Paging St. Anselm!

 

[Midnight Judges]

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.

Your post betrays a severe lack of understanding for what is being discussed here.

 

[GreatGonzo]

That's what I thought and most people would disagree with this statment.

After all we already have that graph for their first 9 years adjusted, they are pretty close offensively, albeit McDavid has the slightly larger sample size.

But maybe you are talking about last season?

Are we talking about the same graph that many here said was ridiculous? Post the graph again if I’m wrong…

 

[Nadal On Clay]

It’s funny how some people can’t handle the truth. Hockey is a team sport. The ultimate goal is to win the cup, not to see who can reach 40 pts in the playoffs first. At some point, McDavid has to wonder why his team isn’t succeeding the way it should in the playoffs and what could be done to improve the situation. I see a lot of people wonder about what would Crosby’s career look like if he didn’t win as many times….







.. I guess we’ll never know.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Just wondering are you comparing the 6.9% difference in regular season scoring or playoff scoring for the 2 years?


The statistic is distorted because of Crosby's rookie season where his team had a .354% and it's also has people drawing conclusions that simply aren't there.

It's a simple ploy being used by simple people who are sometimes not being intellectually honest.

Regular season, I’ve never found playoffs list by year.
Best I found was playoff scoring per team on average from ‘08 to ‘21, scoring was down 4.4% compared to regular season numbers.

Original poster has already acknowledged he was using Malkin points not Crosby’s in comparison. So made Crosby’s percentage worse.

Just wondering are you comparing the 6.9% difference in regular season scoring or playoff scoring for the 2 years?


The statistic is distorted because of Crosby's rookie season where his team had a .354% and it's also has people drawing conclusions that simply aren't there.

It's a simple ploy being used by simple people who are sometimes not being intellectually honest.

No the statistic is not distorted at all, since Malkin wasn’t in the league, so Crosby’s rookie season isn’t included in the calculation.
FYI - I made that point in the first comment as well, but somehow you ignored it.

 

[Midnight Judges]

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.

Datsyuk's career PK TOI per game is more than double Crosby's in the regular season and 5x Crosby's in the playoffs.

You don't have a point.

Of course, Datsyuk's on-ice goals against is light years ahead of Sidney Crosby's, you know, because Datsyuk was actually great at defense whereas Crosby is often among the worst players in the entire NHL defensively.

Just last year Crosby was on the ice for 93 ES goals against. Sid was the second worst defensive player on his entire team. -That is a piss poor defensive result.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It’s funny how some people can’t handle the truth. Hockey is a team sport. The ultimate goal is to win the cup, not to see who can reach 40 pts in the playoffs first. At some point, McDavid has to wonder why his team isn’t succeeding the way it should in the playoffs and what could be done to improve the situation. I see a lot of people wonder about what would Crosby’s career look like if he didn’t win as many times….







.. I guess we’ll never know.

The “truth” is there’s way more at play here and way more things that should/could have happened in order for the Oilers to win….and I’m finding it really hard to see how McDavid was in any way at fault for the TEAM not winning.

“It’s not a race to 40 points.” That’s cute. Yes, belittle his point totals because 40 points isn’t at all impressive and it’s not like only 2 other players have achieved it…

 

[I am not exposed]

It’s funny how some people can’t handle the truth. Hockey is a team sport. The ultimate goal is to win the cup, not to see who can reach 40 pts in the playoffs first. At some point, McDavid has to wonder why his team isn’t succeeding the way it should in the playoffs and what could be done to improve the situation. I see a lot of people wonder about what would Crosby’s career look like if he didn’t win as many times….







.. I guess we’ll never know.

The clue is right there. A team sport. Yet Crosby gets praised for team accomplishments. I guess if McDavid scores less points but gives more high fives and they win the cup then that makes him the better player....

 

[Coffey]

User name is very ironic for the comment eh?

Definitely not.
Coffey wasn't a Pronger.

 

[norrisnick]

That's what I thought and most people would disagree with this statment.

After all we already have that graph for their first 9 years adjusted, they are pretty close offensively, albeit McDavid has the slightly larger sample size.

But maybe you are talking about last season?

I don't subscribe to the notion of using "most people" as a voice of authority.

They really aren't, but do go on.

Crosby was wholly absent defensively early in his career, in his elder years he's gotten just about as bad again. There was a brief lull of mediocrity in the middle of his career, but beyond that... it's an invented narrative that holds no merit.

 

[norrisnick]

It’s funny how some people can’t handle the truth. Hockey is a team sport. The ultimate goal is to win the cup, not to see who can reach 40 pts in the playoffs first. At some point, McDavid has to wonder why his team isn’t succeeding the way it should in the playoffs and what could be done to improve the situation. I see a lot of people wonder about what would Crosby’s career look like if he didn’t win as many times….







.. I guess we’ll never know.

[insert Nic Cage "You don't say" gif]

And yet these cup wins are invariably attributed to key beloved players and not the teams....

 

[Nadal On Clay]

The clue is right there. A team sport. Yet Crosby gets praised for team accomplishments. I guess if McDavid scores less points but gives more high fives and they win the cup then that makes him the better player....

It wouldn’t make him a better player, but he wouldn’t be worse. The major difference is that he would be “greater”. He would be seen as a winner and would probably be closer to Crosby on the all-time list too, if not ahead. McDavid will never be seen amongst the greatest (top 5) if he doesn’t win. It’s a precedent that has been set more than 100 years ago. It’s not going to change. I fully expect him to win one at some point, but he’ll never be seen as being greater than Crosby (who won a lot), if he doesn’t end up winning. It doesn’t matter how many individual trophies he wins, if he can’t get the big one, it’s going to be one big red flag in his resume. Like it or not, that’s how it’s going to be.

Bourque and Hasek got punished for not winning in their prime, with Boston and Buffalo respectively. They both have extremely good individual cases for the #5 spot, but instead, they were both seen outside the top 10 in the most recent consensus ranking on here. (Bourque was 10th, but will undeniably be surpassed by Crosby as the list was made in 2018). Also, I don’t even think there was a player who didn’t win the cup in the top 50, so that says a lot.

All the McDavid stans/Crosby haters can hope for is that the Oilers get more lucky in the next couple of seasons, because so far, McDavid has not been dominant enough vs his peers to be ranked above Crosby without winning the big one.

 

[norrisnick]

It wouldn’t make him a better player, but he wouldn’t be worse. The major difference is that he would be “greater”. He would be seen as a winner and would probably be closer to Crosby on the all-time list too, if not ahead. McDavid will never be seen amongst the greatest (top 5) if he doesn’t win. It’s a precedent that has been set more than 100 years ago. It’s not going to change. I fully expect him to win one at some point, but he’ll never be seen as being greater than Crosby (who won a lot), if he doesn’t end up winning. It doesn’t matter how many individual trophies he wins, if he can’t get the big one, it’s going to be one big red flag in his resume. Like it or not, that’s how it’s going to be.

Bourque and Hasek got punished for not winning in their prime, with Boston and Buffalo respectively. They both have extremely good individual cases for the #5 spot, but instead, they were both seen outside the top 10 in the most recent consensus ranking on here. (Bourque was 10th, but will undeniably be surpassed by Crosby as the list was made in 2018). Also, I don’t even think there was a player who didn’t win the cup in the top 50, so that says a lot.

All the McDavid stans can hope for is that the Oilers get more lucky in the next couple of seasons, because so far, McDavid has not been dominant enough vs his peers to be ranked above Crosby without winning the big one.

Only by Pens fans 20 years after the fact.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It wouldn’t make him a better player, but he wouldn’t be worse. The major difference is that he would be “greater”. He would be seen as a winner and would probably be closer to Crosby on the all-time list too, if not ahead. McDavid will never be seen amongst the greatest (top 5) if he doesn’t win. It’s a precedent that has been set more than 100 years ago. It’s not going to change. I fully expect him to win one at some point, but he’ll never be seen as being greater than Crosby (who won a lot), if he doesn’t end up winning. It doesn’t matter how many individual trophies he wins, if he can’t get the big one, it’s going to be one big red flag in his resume. Like it or not, that’s how it’s going to be.

Bourque and Hasek got punished for not winning in their prime, with Boston and Buffalo respectively. They both have extremely good individual cases for the #5 spot, but instead, they were both seen outside the top 10 in the most recent consensus ranking on here. (Bourque was 10th, but will undeniably be surpassed by Crosby as the list was made in 2018). Also, I don’t even think there was a player who didn’t win the cup in the top 50, so that says a lot.

All the McDavid stans/Crosby haters can hope for is that the Oilers get more lucky in the next couple of seasons, because so far, McDavid has not been dominant enough vs his peers to be ranked above Crosby without winning the big one.

In terms of Legacy, sure. But to say Crosby is simply the better player because he has won a cup and McDavid hasn’t is lazy. A cup would add to anyone’s legacy and I’m not saying he doesn’t need one, but he isn’t below Crosby because of cups alone.

That’s not true at all. Bourque and Hasek were a consesus top 2-3 in their position before they won their cups. The cups they won simply added to their legacy, but no one was giving them grief for not winning a cup with those Boston and especially those Buffalo teams..

That’s interesting. I don’t recall Crosbys playoff runs being more dominant than other players(his own teammates). I could argue McDavids 153 point season and 42 point post season as more dominant than anything Crosby has done..

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Only by Pens fans 20 years after the fact.

I don’t need to hate on other great players to propel my favorite players (like some posters here love to do), as they (my players) will be forever remembered as people who dominated their sport for more than a decade, while winning every single important accolade, more than once.

Despite the contrary belief of some, I wish McDavid wins his cup as it would be a shame to see someone that great, not be able to lift the big trophy. Nevertheless, I’m not going to give McDavid a free pass for not winning if that ends up being the case, and neither will people who played sports, watched sports and want their rankings to be considered objective.