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

[MacMacandBarbie]

Since reading isn’t your strong suit, I’ll just say it again. I said if they BOTH were in the same tier, I’d argue McDavid above Crosby, is he in a whole other tier? I wouldn’t say yet. Possibly by the end of his career. Is that really that hard to understand? Did you get all that?

I think I got it now. Pull it out of you was rough, though.

Well then agree to disagree? Again, what McDavid has accomplished in this era is pretty special and the fact that only 2-3 players(or none) have done it….it makes it very elite.

What is this thing that he has done that only 2 or 3 players have ever done? Are you talking about the 100 assist season? That Kucherov did in the same season? You are talking about setting the single assist record for playoffs?

Crosby has done some elite things too. Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Parent, and Crosby is the list of names of players who have won 2 conn smythes. Crosby is the only player with 19 or more seasons above a PPG. He has done some special things. I think when you are avoiding some of the major accomplishments like degree in which someone led the league in points, or an entire facet of the game like goal scoring dominance, you are avoiding the aspects that make Orr/Howe/Lemieux/Gretzky legendary.

That’s not to say Howe is for sure outside the big 4, his resume speaks for itself. Again though, I’d say between Crosby and McDavid, Howe is the one one of them could most likely pass up when all said is done.

I assume you just haven't looked at Howe's accomplishments. Zero chance McDavid repeats 2023 to the tune of 3 more times, which is what he would have to do to match Howe.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Not nearly as special as you. Seriously. I've never seen anything like this before

Says the guy who said

“Crosbys in the ‘09 finals didn’t underperform while McDavid in ‘24 did.”

Yes it takes a special individual to have that sort of logic

 

[PainForShane]

Says the guy who said

“Crosbys in the ‘09 finals didn’t underperform while McDavid in ‘24 did.”

Yes it takes a special individual to have that sort of logic

Apparently still don't understand what clutch means do ya. "Meaningful games" is definitely too hard. Those were some complicated conversations eh?

Gonzo is the gift that keeps on giving

 

[norrisnick]

Alright GreatGonzo, I will humor you. If you think McDavid is a whole tier above Crosby, but you don't think he is in Gretzky/Mario/Orr/Lemiuex tier, please enlighten us on what tier you think he is on? His own? By himself with a random 'hot take' type of player? Curious if you can manage to respond with a coherent answer to the question I just asked, instead of trying to tear apart this question and avoid it like a politician.

Gretzky/Howe/Orr/Lemieux aren't all in the same tier. So McDavid being a tier above Crosby wouldn't have anything to do with a singular tier that doesn't exist.

Big Four is a misnomer as it improperly equates them with each other when they most certainly weren't equal.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I think I got it now. Pull it out of you was rough, though.

What is this thing that he has done that only 2 or 3 players have ever done? Are you talking about the 100 assist season? That Kucherov did in the same season? You are talking about setting the single assist record for playoffs?

Crosby has done some elite things too. Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Parent, and Crosby is the list of names of players who have won 2 conn smythes. Crosby is the only player with 19 or more seasons above a PPG. He has done some special things. I think when you are avoiding some of the major accomplishments like degree in which someone led the league in points, or an entire facet of the game like goal scoring dominance, you are avoiding the aspects that make Orr/Howe/Lemieux/Gretzky legendary.

I assume you just haven't looked at Howe's accomplishments. Zero chance McDavid repeats 2023 to the tune of 3 more times, which is what he would have to do to match Howe.

-42 points in the post season(most not named Gretzky or Lemieux)
-34 assists in a post season(broke Gretzkys record)
-100 Assist(third player to do so after Gretzky and Lemieux)
-153 points in a season(most after Yzerman, Gretzky, Lemieux)
-4 Lindsays(only Gretzky has more, tied with Lemieux)
-5 Art Rosses(Tied with Jagr and Esposito. Only Gretzky and Lemieux, and Howe have more

Those are some that should be noted.

I didn’t avoid anything. Crosby has accomplished a lot.

Who knows. Passing Howe is a tall order but only time will tell.

Apparently still don't understand what clutch means do ya. "Meaningful games" is definitely too hard. Those were some complicated conversations eh?

Gonzo is the gift that keeps on giving

7-1-2-3 -3: “clutch”
7-3-8-11 +5: “underperformed”

 

[wetcoast]

“Some guess work.” It’s almost like 2023 exists or something….

Sure and you focus on Crosby's 99 games as if he were an ordinary player outside of that short game stretch due to injuries.

Like I said you inconsistencies seem to fall one way only.

Crosbys 41 game, 132 pace is a “guess.” McDavid sustained the same pace in 2023….over a full schedule….playing all the games..

Like I have stated up thread reasonable people can come to reasonable probabilities of what may have happened, not that they really need to though as we have full season evidence before and after....wait you seem to only be charitable in certain circumstances yet expect people to take your position seriously?

But please add “context” to that year while your at it.


That’s what I thought

Context is context and it should be applied reasonably and fairly and if it isn't then the person showing blatant bias has problems in their arguments.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Sure and you focus on Crosby's 99 games as if he were an ordinary player outside of that short game stretch due to injuries.

Like I said you inconsistencies seem to fall one way only.


Like I have stated up thread reasonable people can come to reasonable probabilities of what may have happened, not that they really need to though as we have full season evidence before and after....wait you seem to only be charitable in certain circumstances yet expect people to take your position seriously?


Context is context and it should be applied reasonably and fairly and if it isn't then the person showing blatant bias has problems in their arguments.

Because he didn’t sustain that level play through a full seaosn….McDavid did. How is that hard to understand? You are lecturing me about inconsistencies? That’s rich

Reasonable? There’s nothing reasonable about a 132 point PACE being better than a 153 point raw total. No matter what many times got try to spin it, it never goes your way because your argument is greatly flawed, that’s why you add so much “context” to McDavids achievements and then change up your argument when it benefits Crosby.

Your attempt to add context is hilarious. Mainly because what you try to argue really doesn’t hold any weight.

I mean this is the same poster that proclaimed that Crosbys ‘09 finals is underrated where as McDavids ‘24 finals is overrated: why, “points.”

Face it. You lost tons of credit and arguing power with that ridiculous take.

 

[DitchMarner]

Here's one means of comparison:

2011:

Full season pace:

Crosby: 132 points
Daniel Sedin: 104 points
Martin St. Louis: 99 points
Corey Perry: 98 points
Henrik Sedin: 94 points
Getzlaf: 93 points
Stamkos: 91 points
Selanne: 90 points
Ovechkin: 89 points
Brad Richards: 88 points

Here are the percentages of Crosby's projected total that players scored at:

Daniel: 79%
St. Louis: 75%
Perry: 74%
Henrik: 71%
Getzlaf: 70%
Stamkos: 69%
Selanne: 68%
Ovechkin: 67%
Richards: 67%

2021:

Full season pace:

McDavid: 105 points
Draisaitl: 84 points
Panarin: 77 points
Mackinnon: 76 points
Marchand: 73 points
Matthews: 71 points
Rantanen: 71 points
Marner: 68 points
Kane: 66 points
Barkov: 65 points

Here are the percentages of McDavid's projected total that players scored at:

Draisaitl: 80%
Panarin: 73%
MacKinnon: 72%
Marchand: 70%
Matthews: 68%
Rantanen; 68%
Marner: 65%
Kane: 63%
Barkov: 62%


Rather similar. McDavid has an advantage, but it's not enormous.


However, if we do the comparison from Jan 5, 2011 (when Crosby was at 41 games played and so were Stamkos and St. Louis), here are the results:

Full season pace:

Crosby: 132 points
Stamkos: 112 points
Henrik: 105 points
Daniel: 105 points
St. Louis: 102 points
Datsyuk: 97 points
Richards: 94 points
Zetterberg: 93 points
Chris Stewart: 89 points
Kopitar: 89 points

Here are the percentages of Crosby's projected total that players scored at:

Stamkos: 85%
Sedin: 80%
Sedin: 80%
St. Louis: 77%
Datsyuk: 73%
Richards: 71%
Zetterberg: 70%
Stewart; 67%
Kopitar: 67%

The differences:

2021 to full 2011:

1% (Crosby's favor)
2% (McDavid's favor)
2% (McDavid's favor)
1% (McDavid's favor)
2% (McDavid's favor)
1% (McDavid's favor)
3% (McDavid's favor)
4% (McDavid's favor)
5% (McDavid's favor)

2021 to half 2011:

5% (McDavid's favor)
7% (McDavid's favor)
8% (McDavid's favor)
7% (McDavid's favor)
5% (McDavid's favor)
3% (McDavid's favor)
5% (McDavid's favor)
4% (McDavid's favor)
5% (McDavid's favor)


When comparing from the mid-season point of 2011 (before certain top scorers' averages atrophied), the gaps become considerable. I don't think this on its own proves McDavid is in a higher tier, but considering this is how well he stacks up against Crosby at his best and he already has a dominant 82 game season under his belt as well, two or three more really big seasons can definitely put him in a higher tier. As I said earlier, the next two or three seasons should answer the question.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Gretzky/Howe/Orr/Lemieux aren't all in the same tier. So McDavid being a tier above Crosby wouldn't have anything to do with a singular tier that doesn't exist.

Big Four is a misnomer as it improperly equates them with each other when they most certainly weren't equal.

These players were definitely comparable in the sense that, in their prime, they had no equals. Even at their worst, they were better than the rest of the league. They were so good that they stood head and shoulders above their peers, leaving little to no doubt about their superiority.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

-42 points is the most in a post season(most not named Gretzky or Lemieux)
-34 assists in a post season(broke Gretzkys record)

So obsessed with raw totals. Do you think it is the best postseason not named lemieux or gretzky? Because you will have a hard time convincing just about anybody who has studied hockey and been around longer than McDavid's rookie season that this run he just came off is better than 1996 Sakic or 1981 Bossy.

-100 Assist(third player to do so after Gretzky and Lemieux)

In the same season that Kucherov did it too. Again with the raw total numbers to inflate McDavid's accomplishments to make them sound more special than they already are.

-153 points in a season(most after Yzerman, Gretzky, Lemieux)

So is Yzerman better than McDavid?

-4 Lindsays(only Gretzky has more, tied with Lemieux)

I mean the award wasn't even around in Howe's and Orr's day. I am willing to bet more names would be on that list as well. Another weird compilation trophy though, not a trophy that demonstrates dominance above his peers.

-5 Art Rosses(Tied with Jagr and Esposito. Only Gretzky and Lemieux, and Howe have more

same as above.

Those are some that should be noted.

Noted.

I didn’t avoid anything. Crosby has accomplished a lot.

Fair.

Who knows. Passing Howe is a tall order but only time will tell.

We can agree on one thing at least.

7-1-2-3 -3: “clutch”
7-3-8-11 +5: “underperformed”

Jeez man.

 

[wetcoast]

Because he didn’t sustain that level play through a full seaosn….McDavid did. How is that hard to understand? You are lecturing me about inconsistencies? That’s rich, Daver

No one is claiming the absolutist view that he would have gotten 132.

The argument is that it's reasonable, given his pre and post scoring and as expressed so well his first half and second half scoring that he would have lapped the field and easily won the Hart and Art Ross in 10-11 and 12-13 quiet easily.

11-12 who knows but the focus by you and the other poster is instead to pretend that Crosby was a 66 point guy in 10-11 and not the absolute highest performing player in the league that season.

Reasonable? There’s nothing reasonable about a 132 point PACE being better than a 153 point raw total.

My argument was about the 56 game season but as is typical for you instead of acknowledging the argument you are going off in a different direction as per usual

No matter what many times got try to spin it, it never goes your way because your argument is greatly flawed, that’s why you add so much “context” to McDavids achievements and then change up your argument when it benefits Crosby.

Your attempt to add context is hilarious. Mainly because what you try to argue really doesn’t hold any weight.

U always look at context and I don't pick and choose something you might consider instead of whatever it is that you are doing since a poster called you out when you did that they are basically the same level in their first 9 years.

I mean this is the same poster that proclaimed that Crosbys ‘09 finals is underrated where as McDavids ‘24 finals is overrated: why, “points.”

Face it. You lost tons of credit and arguing power with that ridiculous take.

Not even sure if you know what you are talking about here.

 

[Double Dion]

McDavid is slightly better offensively. Crosby is definitely better in terms of all around play.

 

[GreatGonzo]

So obsessed with raw totals. Do you think it is the best postseason not named lemieux or gretzky? Because you will have a hard time convincing just about anybody who has studied hockey and been around longer than McDavid's rookie season that this run he just came off is better than 1996 Sakic or 1981 Bossy.

In the same season that Kucherov did it too. Again with the raw total numbers to inflate McDavid's accomplishments to make them sound more special than they already are.

So is Yzerman better than McDavid?

I mean the award wasn't even around in Howe's and Orr's day. I am willing to bet more names would be on that list as well. Another weird compilation trophy though, not a trophy that demonstrates dominance above his peers.

same as above.

Noted.

Fair.

We can agree on one thing at least.

Jeez man.

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” 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.

No one is claiming the absolutist view that he would have gotten 132.

The argument is that it's reasonable, given his pre and post scoring and as expressed so well his first half and second half scoring that he would have lapped the field and easily won the Hart and Art Ross in 10-11 and 12-13 quiet easily.

11-12 who knows but the focus by you and the other poster is instead to pretend that Crosby was a 66 point guy in 10-11 and not the absolute highest performing player in the league that season.

My argument was about the 56 game season but as is typical for you instead of acknowledging the argument you are going off in a different direction as per usual




U always look at context and I don't pick and choose something you might consider instead of whatever it is that you are doing since a poster called you out when you did that they are basically the same level in their first 9 years.

Not even sure if you know what you are talking about here.

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.

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.

 

[norrisnick]

These players were definitely comparable in the sense that, in their prime, they had no equals. Even at their worst, they were better than the rest of the league. They were so good that they stood head and shoulders above their peers, leaving little to no doubt about their superiority.

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.

McDavid is slightly better offensively. Crosby is definitely better in terms of all around play.

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

 

[LandfiII]

I don't think Crosby would condone the hiring of human excrement like Connor does.

I guess that puts Sid "a tier above" as a person.

 

[norrisnick]

I don't think Crosby would condone the hiring of human excrement like Connor does.

I guess that puts Sid "a tier above" as a person.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1816154640796283243

 

[PainForShane]

7-1-2-3 -3: “clutch”
7-3-8-11 +5: “underperformed”

Like I said above (and is obvious to even the most casual lurker), 'clutch' and 'meaningful games' are two concepts that you don't seem to understand despite pretending to try (or actually trying, who knows) for multiple pages.

I think everyone understands that the total number of points someone scored in a series have no relation to how important those points were to the outcome of the series. Except for you.

I've never seen anyone laugh at others so much due to their own inability / unwillingness to understand basic things. Legendary thread indeed.

 

[bobbyking]

This is such a dumb way to look at it. If that’s the case you shouldn’t hold McDavid’s 20-21 as a Lemieux-like since he had 69 points through the first 42 games then 36 points in the final 14 games.

crosby was ppg for the first 20 games that year

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

This sentence is all sorts of hyperbolic drivel.

Uhh, no it isn't. Gretzky won the Art Ross 7 out of 8 of his first 8 seasons. Some of those years he played better than others. Orr won the Norris 8 years straight. Some years he played worse than others. From 1951 to 1954 Howe won the Art Ross 4 straight years, and led in assists, goals, and points in 2 of those years. Lemieux when healthy consistently stole the Art Ross from prime Gretzky and then dominated head and shoulders above the league when Gretzky fell off in the mid 90s. Those are long stretches of dominance above the rest of the league.

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.

Yeah duh, the whole basis of 'tiers' and its because people compare these players all the time, and have varying different opinions. Whether you like it or not, there is an argument for all 3 of those names being above Gretzky, especially Lemieux and Orr.

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

Again, we can disagree. The point is that they are comparable players.

 

[pi314]

Apparently still don't understand what clutch means do ya. "Meaningful games" is definitely too hard. Those were some complicated conversations eh?

Gonzo is the gift that keeps on giving

I blocked Gonzo years ago.

Shows up in every thread spewing the same nonsense for at least 5 years.

Crosby lives rent free in his head.

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.


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

That’s not what NHL players polls say.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

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.

You know, like raw totals, instead of comparing accomplishments. Making it seem like McDavid's playoffs was the 3rd best player performance ever behind Gretzky and Lemieux because you want to harp on raw point totals.

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.

It is up there. So is Sakic and Bossy's run. So is Malkin's. I don't put somebody in Gretzky/Lemieux territory just because they achieved something similar one time.

“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…

Well, it does. McDavid didn't accomplish a rare feat that is a coveted record or something. I hadn't even heard of the record before this year. Joe Thornton got 96 assists and won the Hart in 2006. That was a better playmaking season. It just didn't hit some unique raw total number. You want to bring up sexy sounding numbers like it puts him in Gretzky's tier. It doesn't.

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

It is when you use stats from a higher scoring era and compare it to a player stats from a low scoring era, without any context.

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.

Unless it doesn't suit your argument, then you will be happy to bring up the higher scoring environment that Yzerman got his big seasons during.

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.

I don't know what the 'excuse' is, but I just don't think McDavid is on Gretzky's level, nor will he likely ever get there. And no amount of bending stats to fit a narrative will make me buy into it, I need McDavid to be more dominant above his peers like the players you so desperately want to compare him to.

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.

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.

You seem more upset that McDavid hasn't done enough to really enter into that next tier conversation.

My favorite hockey player was me, and I couldn't even break my own heart. I don't have some weird attachment to one player over the other. I like every player we have discussed so far.

 

[Golden_Jet]

So what we’re learning here is.
Raw totals bad, pace is where it’s at.
Stanley cup final elimination games are not meaningful.
It’s better to compare 3 rounds of Crosby to 4 rounds of McDavid, this dumb comparison, still hasn’t been answered. Why not compare ‘09 to ‘24 in their entirety.
Keep up the entertainment.

 

[thegazelle]

I think there are some other intangibles that factor in my assessment of Crosby vs. McDavid, some of which cannot be quantified by stats. Stuff like leadership, ambassadorship of the game, longevity over time (which can't really be assessed on McDavid as he is still much younger). There are facets where Crosby is PROVEN to be top of class. McDavid not there yet.

And this from a guy who hated Crosby when he came into the league - I thought he was a spoiled whiner. But over time he has proven me wrong and shown he is truly a once in a generation well rounded phenom with superior hockey IQ, athletic conditioning, but also has been at the pinnacle of ultimate performance and in doing so, have never brought disrepute to the game and now, all these years later, is deeply respected by both peers and fans alike.

 

[DitchMarner]

So what we’re learning here is.
Raw totals bad, pace is where it’s at.
Stanley cup final elimination games are not meaningful.
It’s better to compare 3 rounds of Crosby to 4 rounds of McDavid, this dumb comparison, still hasn’t been answered. Why not compare ‘09 to ‘24 in their entirety.
Keep up the entertainment.

I feel there should be consistency. If you're going to compare half a season of PPG dominance, compare it to half seasons for others, not full seasons. If you're going to compare playoff runs, compare an equal number of rounds. If you're going to compare SCF performances, compare what the two relevant players did (ie it doesn't matter if someone like Max Talbot has a big Game Seven).

 

[Golden_Jet]

I feel there would be consistency. If you're going to compare half a season of PPG dominance, compare it to half seasons for others, not full seasons. If you're going to compare playoff runs, compare an equal number of rounds. If you're going to compare SCF performances, compare what the two relevant players did (ie it doesn't matter if someone like Max Talbot has a big Game Seven).

Agree, there is no consistency in comparisons.
It’s basically cherry picking and moving the goalposts in this thread.