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

[Roksta]

McDavid is better than Crosby offensively

No way he is in a higher tier of player. Stop smoking la ganja

 

[PainForShane]

gaslighting?…..are you just one of those people that love throwing that word around because it makes you feel special?

No. But I love that you are continuing this behavior in the actual response to my statement.

@Midnight Judges I see your post and will get back to you after hours (I'm west coast US). Based on what you said I think we're mostly in agreement but imo maybe some nuance worth exploring

 

[GreatGonzo]

No. But I love that you are continuing this behavior in the actual response to my statement.

@Midnight Judges I see your post and will get back to you after hours (I'm west coast US). Based on what you said I think we're mostly in agreement but imo maybe some nuance worth exploring

Clearly you have no idea what “gaslighting” means.

Either way, the idea that Crosby makes lesser players around him greater and McDavid doesn’t Is simply false

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

So we are going back to the whole false idea that McDavid doesn’t make his teammates better? Or is more of a product of better linemates compared to Crosby?

Lazy and untrue

Dupuis had 21 points in 85 games spanning across 3 seasons. Not only was he often hurt, he looked like he was done as player.

Kunitz was kicked off the top line in Anaheim cause he couldn’t even right coattails well. His production took a sharp nosedive and he finished with 35 points the season before joining the penguins.

Nobody is saying McDavid doesn’t make his teammates better, we are just saying he doesn’t have to play with bad teammates. It’s a little easier taking career top line players and sticking them on McDavid’s wing and hoping they perform better than it would be if McDavid had to have cast off and reclamation projects and be expected to go win a cup.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs for something so obvious to some.....

 

[Regal]

More competition capable of winning = tougher competition

Then you agree that the competition for the race is weaker.
How competitive a race is is indistinguishable from how tough the competition is.
I'll even highlight the similiarities between these words for you.
Competitive
Competition

Charles Barkley: I played a basketball game against nine-year-olds. I put no effort into it and never broke a sweat. I won 40-0.
You: Wow, what a tough competition that must have been for you.

Crosby alone missing the games wouldn't matter, because one of the other elite players would win the scoring race, which is what happened. More people wouldn't be able to win; if anything, fewer people would be able to win.
If you removed all of the elite players, then the scoring race would be more competitive.

More competitive and better competition are not the same thing whatsoever. One is quantitative, the other is qualitative

 

[GreatGonzo]

Dupuis had 21 points in 85 games spanning across 3 seasons. Not only was he often hurt, he looked like he was done as player.

Kunitz was kicked off the top line in Anaheim cause he couldn’t even right coattails well. His production took a sharp nosedive and he finished with 35 points the season before joining the penguins.

Nobody is saying McDavid doesn’t make his teammates better, we are just saying he doesn’t have to play with bad teammates. It’s a little easier taking career top line players and sticking them on McDavid’s wing and hoping they perform better than it would be if McDavid had to have cast off and reclamation projects and be expected to go win a cup.

So now we are saying, all of Crosbys linemates have been “bad” while all of McDavids have been good? So basically, Connor is a product of his own wingers?

 

[PainForShane]

So now we are saying, all of Crosbys linemates have been “bad” while all of McDavids have been good? So basically, Connor is a product of his own wingers?

That's... obviously not what he said.

 

[GreatGonzo]

That's... obviously not what he said.

Seems like that’s what he’s implying…care to help translate since that’s apparently not what he was saying? Since it’s so “obvious”

It’s hilarious. Now it’s “Crosby had to deal with BAD linemates….making his production obviously more impressive than McDavid, he has had studs on his wing.”

 

[PainForShane]

Seems like that’s what he’s implying…care to help translate since that’s apparently not what he was saying? Since it’s so “obvious”

It’s hilarious. Now it’s “Crosby had to deal with BAD linemates….making his production obviously more impressive than McDavid, he has had studs on his wing.”

He said McDavid had better wingers. Having better wingers has absolutely nothing to do with being a product of your wingers. Being a product of your wingers also has nothing to do with whatever your last sentence is talking about.

To be fair, your last sentence may be not that far off from where he may have been going, but I think everyone understands that has nothing to do with McDavid being a product of his wingers. Which is how you incorrectly summarized his original argument in last post.

I'm out of crayons.

 

[GreatGonzo]

He said McDavid had better wingers. Having better wingers has absolutely nothing to do with being a product of your wingers. Being a product of your wingers also has nothing to do with whatever your last sentence is talking about.

To be fair, your last sentence may be not that far off from where he may have been going, but I think everyone understands that has nothing to do with McDavid being a product of his wingers. Which is how you incorrectly summarized his original argument in last post.

I'm out of crayons.

So we went from, that’s not what he was implying…to, he MAY have been going there. Which is it?

So what was the point of saying something like this if it has nothing to do with production? He clearly said it’s easier to put “top line” players on McDavids wing than having cats offs….like Crosby(?)

 

[PainForShane]

So we went from, that’s not what he was implying…to, he MAY have been going there. Which is it?

So what was the point of saying something like this if it has nothing to do with production? He clearly said it’s easier to put “top line” players on McDavids wing than having cats offs….like Crosby(?)

It's the fact this has nothing to do with McDavid being a product of his wingers. Which was your original summary of what he said.

Do you still have questions about this? Shouldn't be this difficult to understand

 

[GreatGonzo]

It's the fact this has nothing to do with McDavid being a product of his wingers. Which was your original summary of what he said.

Do you still have questions about this? Shouldn't be this difficult to understand

Then what’s the point of bringing up wingers? What’s the point of saying Crosby has had “bad” wingers while McDavid has had good ones?..

 

[PainForShane]

Then what’s the point of bringing up wingers? What’s the point of saying Crosby has had “bad” wingers while McDavid has had good ones?..

I guess the answer was yes, you do have further questions about this. However, I have run out of crayons.

I guess you will have to understand the meaning of "Connor is a product of his own wingers" (ie your original incorrect summary) all by yourself. Here is a hint: it doesn't have anything to do with his original argument or the argument you're making now.

Good luck!

 

[HanSolo]

Coming from someone who actively rooted for Edmonton to lose in every round this year, I think they're in the same tier and give the slight edge to McDavid. Yes Crosby has the team accolades but to me, if Edmonton doesn't have McDavid, they're a bubble team at best. Pittsburgh in their best years could still survive and play well for extended stretches without Crosby.

When McDavid is in and he's on, the Oilers are a rocket powered wagon. Even if you get him banged up and exhausted (see, Game 7 SCF) or out of the lineup entirely the quality of the entire Oilers lineup declines.

That isn't to say Pittsburgh in their cup winning days wouldn't be weakened by having Crosby out of the lineup, I just think it's a different degree of impact. To me, that matters more than things like total cups which is, by and large, not in McDavid's control, or not entirely. He doesn't build the roster through trades and signings. He didn't ink Nurse to that albatross of a contract.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I guess the answer was yes, you do have further questions about this. However, I have run out of crayons.

I guess you will have to understand the meaning of "Connor is a product of his own wingers" (ie your original incorrect summary) all by yourself. Here is a hint: it doesn't have anything to do with his original argument or the argument you're making now.

Good luck!

Do you always use other people’s jokes and beat them to death?

Interesting that there would be no further intentions of bringing that up. So basically he brought it up for no reason what so ever and wasn’t trying to argue anything..

That’s fine. Talking to you has been equivalent to talking to a parrot. Hope you learn some other words other than “crayon.”

 

[Offtheboard412]

Or maybe they simply peaked higher? Those two had 115 points. How many points do you think exactly MSLs best season translate to regarding this era?

It's not just Gaudreau and Huberdeau, we also saw Jason Robertson hit 109 and tied for 6th in scoring a year later. I don't see how you can shit on the top 10 scorers in 03/04 when I see a lot of borderline hall of famers in that list like Hossa, Elias, Alfredsson, plus Kovalchuk who would have been a shoe in had he not retired early and Naslund who broke out later than most but was definitely an elite scorer for a handful of years. If St. louis could put up 94 in 03/04 and 99 in 10/11 and paced for 102 through 48 games in 12/13 I don't see why he couldn't hit 115 maybe even push for 120 in a career year in today's league. St. Louis was an elite playmaking wing for over a decade I don't think it is really a stretch that he could put up some big numbers with Stamkos or even a prime Lecavalier on his line, especially setting them up on power plays which have seen a large increase in efficiency in the 2020's. If you disagree that's fine but this is the last time I'm replying as this conversation has run it's course.

 

[PainForShane]

Do you always use other people’s jokes and beat them to death?

Interesting that there would be no further intentions of bringing that up. So basically he brought it up for no reason what so ever and wasn’t trying to argue anything..

That’s fine. Talking to you has been equivalent to talking to a parrot. Hope you learn some other words other than “crayon.”

No, that's not what he was doing. And I only use other people's "jokes" if I think they apply in the exact way that was originally intended. Though I'm pretty sure neither one of us intended the 'crayon' statement as a joke.

Anyway I think everyone here sees that YOU have been continuously misunderstanding this entire conversation (intentionally or otherwise, I honestly don't care to understand why, I doubt anyone else does either).

Best of luck to you -- my suspicion is that you may need it for reasons having nothing to do with this particular conversation.

 

[Video Nasty]

Certainly. McDavid has taken advantage of the situation he's been handed. I would have loved it if things had been as easy for Crosby as they are for McDavid.

Good for McDavid for taking advantage of the fact that goalie equipment is smaller.

Good for McDavid for taking advantage of the fact that players can't slash the hands or crosscheck people nearly as much.

Good for McDavid for taking advantage of the fact that so few players are capable of challenging him for scoring titles. I would have loved if the only players Crosby had to worry about were Malkin, Ovechkin, Stamkos, and Kane.

Good for McDavid for taking advantage of the fact that goalies are trained differently nowadays, which leads to more goalies with higher floors but fewer goalies with higher ceilings. I would have loved it if Crosby got to face goalies who are pretty much all worse than prime Henrik Lundqvist.

Good for McDavid for taking advantage of the fact that one single goalie from his Division and three goalies from his conference have won a Vezina during his entire playing career. I would have loved it if Crosby could have gotten to play so many games against goalies who've never won the Vezina.

Good for McDavid for getting to make so many deep playoff runs without ever facing a Selke winner, a Norris winner, or a Vezina winner in his prime (Prime being defined as being capable of winning the award once again that season). There are only two postseasons where Crosby played at least two series where that didn't happen, and one of those was 2009, where it did eventually happen in the Stanley Cup Final.

Between the 2013 Eastern Conference Final and the Second Round in 2016, the Penguins played six consecutive playoff series against Vezina-winning goalies in their prime. The Eastern Conference Final was also played against an eventual Vezina-winner, though Vasilevskiy wasn't in his prime yet. Then the Penguins played three series against Vezina winners the next season. Good for McDavid for never having to worry about playing ten playoff series against Vezina-winning goalies in a stretch of 12 playoff series. Good for McDavid for lighting up the goalies he does face. (Well, most of the time. He's only played one playoff series against a Vezina winner in his prime, and the Oilers got swept then.)

By all means, McDavid has made the most of the advantages he's been given. Not all players would be able to. And I admit, I am envious of Oilers fans, because McDavid has had so many opportunities that Crosby did not.


We turn up our noses at it because not only do people like you refuse to acknowledge that McDavid has had it easier by multiple orders of magnitude, but then we have to deal with absolute nonsense like the premise of this thread.

Good for you on assuming the mantle of Crosby’s biggest supporter. I would have loved to have seen Nathaniel knight you.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It's not just Gaudreau and Huberdeau, we also saw Jason Robertson hit 109 and tied for 6th in scoring a year later. I don't see how you can shit on the top 10 scorers in 03/04 when I see a lot of borderline hall of famers in that list like Hossa, Elias, Alfredsson, plus Kovalchuk who would have been a shoe in had he not retired early and Naslund who broke out later than most but was definitely an elite scorer for a handful of years. If St. louis could put up 94 in 03/04 and 99 in 10/11 and paced for 102 through 48 games in 12/13 I don't see why he couldn't hit 115 maybe even push for 120 in a career year in today's league. St. Louis was an elite playmaking wing for over a decade I don't think it is really a stretch that he could put up some big numbers with Stamkos or even a prime Lecavalier on his line, especially setting them up on power plays which have seen a large increase in efficiency in the 2020's. If you disagree that's fine but this is the last time I'm replying as this conversation has run it's course.

What’s doesn’t make sense is how you are going from him scoring 94 points in a lower scoring seaosn to 115-120…you realize 94 adjusted to this era isn’t 115-120 points….so why are you so confident that he can achieve such numbers?

MSL put in 61 points in ‘06 and 102 in ‘07. Both years scoring is very high and similar to this era. So yes it’s quite the stretch..

No, that's not what he was doing. And I only use other people's "jokes" if I think they apply in the exact way that was originally intended. Though I'm pretty sure neither one of us intended the 'crayon' statement as a joke.

Anyway I think everyone here sees that YOU have been continuously misunderstanding this entire conversation (intentionally or otherwise, I honestly don't care to understand why, I doubt anyone else does either).

Best of luck to you -- my suspicion is that you may need it for reasons having nothing to do with this particular conversation.

I thought you were done? Why come back and waste more of your breathe?(or in this case, fingers).

 

[PainForShane]

What’s doesn’t make sense is how you are going from him scoring 94 points in a lower scoring seaosn to 115-120…you realize 94 adjusted to this era isn’t 115-120 points….so why are you so confident that he can achieve such numbers?

MSL put in 61 points in ‘06 and 102 in ‘07. Both years scoring is very high and similar to this era. So yes it’s quite the stretch..


I thought you were done? Why come back and waste more of your breathe?(or in this case, fingers).

Did I say I was done? There's that misunderstanding again (intentional or otherwise). And also, a bit weird to go after someone's "breathe" but you do you

 

[GreatGonzo]

Did I say I was done? There's that misunderstanding again (intentional or otherwise). And also, a bit weird to go after someone's "breathe" but you do you

You forget to write “crayon” somewhere in there. Just saying.

 

[PainForShane]

You forget to write “crayon” somewhere in there. Just saying.

Nah man. The crayon "joke" that you came up with was about something else entirely. Guess you don't understand your own "jokes" either

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

Crosby had 3 points in the Finals in 2009. He got carried offensively by his team in that series. You can't say the same for McDavid at any point in his playoff career.

In 2017 the Penguins ended up against a cinderella opponent.

How was Nashville a Cinderella opponent? You know they won the president's trophy the next season right.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Nah man. The crayon "joke" that you came up with was about something else entirely. Guess you don't understand your own "jokes" either

Ok bud