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

[GreatGonzo]

Wait a second, I was told by plenty of posters that Crosby can play with whoever and immediately makes his teammates better, while McDavid doesn’t. Now all of a sudden, McDavid only scores more because he has better line mates?

The inconsistencies

Hossa and Crosby only played 4 RS games together


Eichel did easily outplay McDavid head to head

And the entire ‘08 playoffs….

How so?

 

[Fourier]

Eichel did easily outplay McDavid head to head

Did he now???

McDavid vs Eichel in the 2023 playoffs 5 vs 5.

CF% 60.98, SF% 61.9%, 1GF 1GA GF% 50%, xGF% 60.74% SCF 64.71%, HDCF 75%

 

[GreatGonzo]

Did he now???

McDavid vs Eichel in the 2023 playoffs 5 vs 5.

CF% 60.98, SF% 61.9%, 1GF 1GA GF% 50%, xGF% 60.74% SCF 64.71%, HDCF 75%

He’s definitely basing it off of who won, so because Eichel won, that automatically means he “out played” McDavid.

Some “useless stats” for certain posters(you know who you are).

McDavid: 6-5-5-10
Eichel: 6-3-6-9

“EASILY out played.”

 

[bambamcam4ever]

I think both sides have a tendency to put their heads in the sand in this debate. I don't agree that McDavid's style is about stat padding. I think he can "win" with how he plays, as seen by him being 1 goal away from doing so this year.

On the flip side, I also think the McDavid side seems to want to refuse to acknowledge that McDavid's linemates have been superior to Crosby's and that will have some (emphasis on some, not all before people cry about this) impact on production, as well as the idea that this year's Oilers team is somehow inferior to all the Penguins teams that won Cups.

The Oilers didn't lose because McDavid plays the "wrong" way, but they also didn't lose because they're an inferior team to what Crosby had. They lost because Florida got one more "bounce" go their way while the 2009 Pens were the recipients of a "weak" goal. Reverse those bounces and does that suddenly mean the 2009 Pens weren't good enough to win a Cup?

In any case, I find this thread tiring because it seems like there's a tendency (from both sides) to acknowledge factors outside a player's control can affect certain things (production, winning, performance) and simply cover their ears with "nope, just excuses!". You can't have an open debate about this because people are too interested in personal insults and "lol you're just making excuses" type responses than actual respectful discourse.

Oh I agree, I've just taken to posting from under the bridge at this point because there are too many posters who can't operate in good faith. See the post directly below yours.

 

[Fourier]

The barrage of stats is great and no one is disputing that McDavid has been the better offensive player in the playoffs but at least do a deeper dive here and show team amtes TOI as well.

McDavid had much better linemates on the ice as well. 23024 than Crosby 15-16 and it's not even close.

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerreport.php?fromseason=20232024&thruseason=20232024&stype=3&sit=5v5&stdoi=std&rate=n&v=t&playerid=8478402

TOI of McDavid's linemates 23-24 top 5

Hyman 368
Bouchard 347
Ekholm 318
RNH 171
Draisatl 121

Sidney Crosby - Teammates - On Ice - Natural Stat Trick

TOI of Crosby's linemates 15-16 top 5

Hornquist 310
Sheary 234
Letang 220
Dumoulin 165
Cole 83

16-17 Crosby

Guentzal 284
Sheary 171
Maatta 137
Dumoulin 120
Schultz 119

Sidney Crosby - Teammates - On Ice - Natural Stat Trick

16-17 for Crosby is a bit better but still pales to 23-24 McDavid and even the McDavid supporters here would agree to that right?

We have been told that Crosby lifts his team to wins but McDavid does not. Yet the actual results show that when Crosby is not on the ice his team had better results than when he was not on the ice. Where as when McDavid is not on the ice there is a noticeable drop off for the Oilers.

But lets play with this a little. Lets look at McDavid, Nuge and Leon, two of the three forwards you listed.

McDavid without either guy GF 66.67% SCF 55.29% HDCF% 62.00% GF/60 3.32 GA/60 1.62

Nuge and Leon Together: GF% 35.71% GF/60 3.48 GA/60 6.27

Leon by himself: GF 50% GF/60 2.59 GA/60 2.59

Nuge by himself: GF 25% GF/60 0.93 GA/60 2.8

What do you see in these patterns???

As a contrast consider 2016:

Crosby with Letang: 213 min: GF/60 2.54 GA/60 1.69 GF% 60%

Crosby without Letang: 157 min: GF/60 2.67 GA/60 4.57 GF% 36.84%

Letang without Crosby: 296 min: GF/60 2.64 GA/60 2.03 GF% 56.52%

Neither on the ice: 521 min: GF/60 2.42 GA/60 1.61 GF% 60%%

We are again told over and over that it is Crosby's leadership and his "winning ways" that set him above McDavid. Yet there is no tangible evidence to support that he is either a better leader or that he does more to help his team win than McDavid or that he was much better defensively at the same age. If you have that please show it to me and I will be happy to acknowledge it.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Oh I agree, I've just taken to posting from under the bridge at this point because there are too many posters who can't operate in good faith. See the post directly below yours.

You literally make nothing but bias/untrue remarks and statements and when countered with actual facts that refute your claims, you immediately avoid it

Please enlighten us, how did Eichel “easily” out play McDavid…or are you going to deflect and run again

We have been told that Crosby lifts his team to wins but McDavid does not. Yet the actual results show that when Crosby is not on the ice his team had better results than when he was not on the ice. Where as when McDavid is not on the ice there is a noticeable drop off for the Oilers.

But lets play with this a little. Lets look at McDavid, Nuge and Leon, two of the three forwards you listed.

McDavid without either guy GF 66.67% SCF 55.29% HDCF% GF/60 3.32 GA/60 1.62

Nuge and Leon Together: GF% 35.71% GF/60 3.48 GA/60 6.27

Leon by himself: GF 50% GF/60 2.59 GA/60 2.59

Nuge by himself: GF 25% GF/60 0.93 GA/60 2.8

What do you see in these patterns??? We are again told over and over that it is Crosby's leadership and his "winning ways" that set him above McDavid. Yet there is no tangible evidence to support that he is either a better leader or that he does more to help his team win than McDavid or that he was much better defensively at the same age. If you have that please show it to me and I will be happy to acknowledge it.

Don’t hit them with too many facts, their heads might start spinning from all the mental gymnastics they have in their heads

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I love the "McDavid had better linemates" argument just a mere pages after "Crosby makes his teammates better" argument. Shouldn't the quality of teammates not matter if one guy can make chicken soup out of chicken shit? Or are we conceding the earlier argument as bullshit?

This is an example of what I mean. You know both things can be true, right? Someone can have inferior linemates while also still being able to elevate what they do play with?

It's like Gretzky with Kurri versus Lemieux with Rob Brown. It can both be true that Gretzky's linemate was superior while also being true that Lemieux had the ability to make the linemate he did have better.

Hell, it applies to McDavid when he was next to Maroon versus, say, MacKinnon having Rantanen and Landeskog. Both arguments can be true - McDavid next to Maroon is inferior to MacKinnon's linemates, while at the same time McDavid "elevated" Maroon.

So I don't know why people simply can't admit that Draisaitl as a linemate is going to help production more than Kunitz/Sheary/Hornqvist type linemates. It's not a knock on McDavid, it's not a criticism of McDavid. Yet the other side literally CANNOT even acknowledge that. At best, you get the above deflection of "well if that's the case, then why does it matter if Crosby can turn anyone into stars?!?!".

 

[Xspyrit]

Hmm... I guess you need it spelled out for you especially since you seem so intent on clowning on multiple other posters for their lack of intelligence (not yours).

1) We're in a Crosby / McDavid thread. You seem to be supporting the idea that McDavid is a tier above Crosby.
2) You said, and I quote, "all the greats were winning it when there was 6, 12 or 16 teams." Again, none of the people you listed are even remotely connected to the topic of this thread.
3) Crosby won 3 cups, every single person who casually follows hockey would consider him a great.

***

If all the greats were winning the cup when there were 6, 12, 16 teams, and if Crosby was a great, then it follows that you're saying Crosby was also winning his cups when there were 6, 12, 16 teams. It's the clear implication of the logic you made in your post. No deduction needed whatsoever.

Of course, this claim and corresponding argument is nonsense. Which is what my response was about.

***

Please pick up as many infractions as you want while addressing the obvious stupidity of your own post. Your oblivious response definitely made my day at least.

16 teams in 2009

I don't need to do anything because you've very capable on your own

I still have no idea how could anyone read my post and come up with this deduction. There could be a few but more like "one in a million" level

What in the world….

That’s not what he implied or argued at all….

Sounds like you didn’t even know there weren’t 16 teams in the league in 2009

Truly, intelligence isn’t a strong suit in this thread for many…

It is absolutely fantastic and exactly why I was never able to quit HF Boards. The free dope is too good

lol, you wrote all that, and even quoted the poster, then still managed to get wrong what poster said. Now that takes talent.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

This is an example of what I mean. You know both things can be true, right? Someone can have inferior linemates while also still being able to elevate what they do play with?

It's like Gretzky with Kurri versus Lemieux with Rob Brown. It can both be true that Gretzky's linemate was superior while also being true that Lemieux had the ability to make the linemate he did have better.

Hell, it applies to McDavid when he was next to Maroon versus, say, MacKinnon having Rantanen and Landeskog. Both arguments can be true - McDavid next to Maroon is inferior to MacKinnon's linemates, while at the same time McDavid "elevated" Maroon.

So I don't know why people simply can't admit that Draisaitl as a linemate is going to help production more than Kunitz/Sheary/Hornqvist type linemates. It's not a knock on McDavid, it's not a criticism of McDavid. Yet the other side literally CANNOT even acknowledge that. At best, you get the above deflection of "well if that's the case, then why does it matter if Crosby can turn anyone into stars?!?!".

Crosby and Barkov have amazing ability to turn third liners into stars. That obviously matters and gives their team more options and depth. The Oilers had worse third line than the Panthers did which is why I think they lost the cup.

 

[BigGoalBrad]

Scoring is up the points are a match adjusted for era. Crosby elevated his team immediately.

Skill relative to other NHLers is a wash maybe Mcdavids faster.

 

[Regal]

This is an example of what I mean. You know both things can be true, right? Someone can have inferior linemates while also still being able to elevate what they do play with?

It's like Gretzky with Kurri versus Lemieux with Rob Brown. It can both be true that Gretzky's linemate was superior while also being true that Lemieux had the ability to make the linemate he did have better.

Hell, it applies to McDavid when he was next to Maroon versus, say, MacKinnon having Rantanen and Landeskog. Both arguments can be true - McDavid next to Maroon is inferior to MacKinnon's linemates, while at the same time McDavid "elevated" Maroon.

So I don't know why people simply can't admit that Draisaitl as a linemate is going to help production more than Kunitz/Sheary/Hornqvist type linemates. It's not a knock on McDavid, it's not a criticism of McDavid. Yet the other side literally CANNOT even acknowledge that. At best, you get the above deflection of "well if that's the case, then why does it matter if Crosby can turn anyone into stars?!?!".

This is the reason I can’t even do these discussions for the most part here. Too many times it goes in circles because people keep claiming logical inconsistencies that don’t exist.

 

[Fourier]

Crosby and Barkov have amazing ability to turn third liners into stars. That obviously matters and gives their team more options and depth. The Oilers had worse third line than the Panthers did which is why I think they lost the cup.

Barkov's linemates in the playoffs were Reinhart and generally one of Verhaeghe or Tarasenko.

The Panthers 3rd line was centered by Lundell. He was on for 4 GF and 4GA vs the Oilers. The Oilers third line was centered by Henrique, primarily with Janmark and Brown. The three were on for 2GF and 1GA and Henrique with one of the two was on for 3GF and 1GA.

 

[DitchMarner]

This is an example of what I mean. You know both things can be true, right? Someone can have inferior linemates while also still being able to elevate what they do play with?

It's like Gretzky with Kurri versus Lemieux with Rob Brown. It can both be true that Gretzky's linemate was superior while also being true that Lemieux had the ability to make the linemate he did have better.

Hell, it applies to McDavid when he was next to Maroon versus, say, MacKinnon having Rantanen and Landeskog. Both arguments can be true - McDavid next to Maroon is inferior to MacKinnon's linemates, while at the same time McDavid "elevated" Maroon.

So I don't know why people simply can't admit that Draisaitl as a linemate is going to help production more than Kunitz/Sheary/Hornqvist type linemates. It's not a knock on McDavid, it's not a criticism of McDavid. Yet the other side literally CANNOT even acknowledge that. At best, you get the above deflection of "well if that's the case, then why does it matter if Crosby can turn anyone into stars?!?!".

I don't know why we have pages and pages and pages of discussion about this year's SCF when it should have been obvious to anyone who watched and has knowledge of hockey that Draisaitl's injury was one of the main reasons the Oilers lost.

Instead, we have people repeatedly trying to fit a peg into a square hole by referencing anything from defense to leadership to intangibles as a reason for why McDavid's showing wasn't as good as it looks, including Daver bringing ridicule upon himself on the History board.

I'm glad defensive stats were posted showing that the Oilers didn't bleed goals against at all when McDavid was on the ice.

You can definitely argue that Crosby had worse linemates and that's why his defensive stats look worse, but if players only have so much control over what happens when they're on the ice, why should they be blamed or credited for things that happen when they're not even on?

The series was lost when McDavid was off the ice. The observations back that up. The stats back that up. The conclusion should simply be that McDavid was their best forward and unfortunately their second best forward got hurt and that probably cost them the series.

 

[pi314]

I don't know why we have pages and pages and pages of discussion about this year's SCF when it should have been obvious to anyone who watched and has knowledge of hockey that Draisaitl's injury was one of the main reasons the Oilers lost.

Instead, we have people repeatedly trying to fit a peg into a square hole by referencing anything from defense to leadership to intangibles as a reason for why McDavid's showing wasn't as good as it looks, including Daver bringing ridicule upon himself on the History board.

I'm glad defensive stats were posted showing that the Oilers didn't bleed goals against at all when McDavid was on the ice.

You can definitely argue that Crosby had worse linemates and that's why his defensive stats look worse, but if players only have so much control over what happens when they're on the ice, why should they be blamed or credited for things that happen when they're not even on?

The series was lost when McDavid was off the ice. The observations back that up. The stats back that up. The conclusion should simply be that McDavid was their best forward and unfortunately their second best forward got hurt and that probably cost them the series.

By game 7, every team is playing through injuries.

At the end of the day, it’s an excuse.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

I don't know why we have pages and pages and pages of discussion about this year's SCF when it should have been obvious to anyone who watched and has knowledge of hockey that Draisaitl's injury was one of the main reasons the Oilers lost.

Instead, we have people repeatedly trying to fit a peg into a square hole by referencing anything from defense to leadership to intangibles as a reason for why McDavid's showing wasn't as good as it looks, including Daver bringing ridicule upon himself on the History board.

I'm glad defensive stats were posted showing that the Oilers didn't bleed goals against at all when McDavid was on the ice.

You can definitely argue that Crosby had worse linemates and that's why his defensive stats look worse, but if players only have so much control over what happens when they're on the ice, why should they be blamed or credited for things that happen when they're not even on?

The series was lost when McDavid was off the ice. The observations back that up. The stats back that up. The conclusion should simply be that McDavid was their best forward and unfortunately their second best forward got hurt and that probably cost them the series.

McDavid's top 5 players he shared ice time with at ES were the Oilers 5 best players aside from McDavid. Obviously if they're going to lose it's because that group wasn't on the ice.

If you stack one line to that degree, the goal isn't to just outscore the opposition while you're on the ice and pat yourself on the back. They need to be able to outscored the opposition to a degree that will offset the other lines inevitably being outscored. They didn't do that in the final, at least in competitive games, and they lost.

 

[DitchMarner]

McDavid's top 5 players he shared ice time with at ES were the Oilers 5 best players aside from McDavid. Obviously if they're going to lose it's because that group wasn't on the ice.

If you stack one line to that degree, the goal isn't to just outscore the opposition while you're on the ice and pat yourself on the back. They need to be able to outscored the opposition to a degree that will offset the other lines inevitably being outscored. They didn't do that in the final, at least in competitive games, and they lost.

You can refer to Fourier's post:

We have been told that Crosby lifts his team to wins but McDavid does not. Yet the actual results show that when Crosby is not on the ice his team had better results than when he was not on the ice. Where as when McDavid is not on the ice there is a noticeable drop off for the Oilers.

But lets play with this a little. Lets look at McDavid, Nuge and Leon, two of the three forwards you listed.

McDavid without either guy GF 66.67% SCF 55.29% HDCF% 62.00% GF/60 3.32 GA/60 1.62

Nuge and Leon Together: GF% 35.71% GF/60 3.48 GA/60 6.27

Leon by himself: GF 50% GF/60 2.59 GA/60 2.59

Nuge by himself: GF 25% GF/60 0.93 GA/60 2.8

What do you see in these patterns???

As a contrast consider 2016:

Crosby with Letang: 213 min: GF/60 2.54 GA/60 1.69 GF% 60%

Crosby without Letang: 157 min: GF/60 2.67 GA/60 4.57 GF% 36.84%

Letang without Crosby: 296 min: GF/60 2.64 GA/60 2.03 GF% 56.52%

Neither on the ice: 521 min: GF/60 2.42 GA/60 1.61 GF% 60%%

We are again told over and over that it is Crosby's leadership and his "winning ways" that set him above McDavid. Yet there is no tangible evidence to support that he is either a better leader or that he does more to help his team win than McDavid or that he was much better defensively at the same age. If you have that please show it to me and I will be happy to acknowledge it.

It seems McDavid did outscore and outplay the opposition to a large degree without Draisaitl or RNH. Drai was mediocre away from the other two and RNH was bad away from the other two. Draisaitl wasn't very good in the Cup final anyway, so I don't thinking having McDavid play with him really counts as "line stacking."

@Fourier, do you have stats for McDavid without Bouchard and Ekholm? He probably did better than Crosby away from Letang in 2016.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

You can refer to Fourier's post:



It seems McDavid did outscore and outplay the opposition to a large degree without Draisaitl or RNH. Drai was mediocre away from the other two and RNH was bad away from the other two. Draisaitl wasn't very good in the Cup final anyway, so I don't thinking having McDavid play with him really counts as "line stacking."

@Fourier, do you have stats for McDavid without Bouchard and Ekholm? He probably did better than Crosby away from Letang in 2016.

So the 25% of the time he was without either Draisaitl or RNH? When he was still with Hyman, Ekholm, and Bouchard? 80% of your ice time at ES with a single Dman is well outside of the norm, which is what McDavid was with Bouchard.

And just LOL at Draisaitl wasn't at his best in the final so it doesn't count as stacking.

What you guys seem to be evading is that McDavid is always set up to succeed individually in the playoffs. He's never put in a position where he could struggle like he did early in his playoff career.

 

[GreatGonzo]

By game 7, every team is playing through injuries.

At the end of the day, it’s an excuse.

Funny considering the amount of excuses I’ve seen get thrown Crosbys way about his game 7 in the finals..

So the 25% of the time he was without either Draisaitl or RNH? When he was still with Hyman, Ekholm, and Bouchard? 80% of your ice time at ES with a single Dman is well outside of the norm, which is what McDavid was with Bouchard.

And just LOL at Draisaitl wasn't at his best in the final so it doesn't count as stacking.

What you guys seem to be evading is that McDavid is always set up to succeed individually in the playoffs. He's never put in a position where he could struggle like he did early in his playoff career.

You heard it here first folks, the guy who had 3 points in 7 games was put on the same line to “stack” points for a guy who had 11 points in the same 7 games…. I’m sure you really thought that made sense too…

Thats funny because Crosby had the luxury of being able to struggle and his team STILL win the game and/or series. When McDavid struggles, the whole team struggles.

Scoring is up the points are a match adjusted for era. Crosby elevated his team immediately.

Skill relative to other NHLers is a wash maybe Mcdavids faster.

I feel like Crosby fans favorite word truly must be “adjusted.”

 

[Fourier]

@Fourier, do you have stats for McDavid without Bouchard and Ekholm? He probably did better than Crosby away from Letang in 2016.

Without those two McDavid was on the ice for 4 GF and 4 GA 5 vs 5 for a 50% GF% in 77 minutes. Now his possession numbers did go down a lot SCF for example were only 40% or so. That's to be expected. But I think people may be missing the key point in my stats. It is not McDavid vs Crosby in absolute terms that is the point. It is each player vs the rest of the team when they are not on the ice.

For example, without any of the three on the ice the Oilers goal share drops to 36.73%. With Bouchard and Ekholm together without McDavd it was 44.44%. The three together it was 72%. That is the consistent pattern. Regardless of which combination of players you choose, the team does markedly better with McDavid than without. Where as in the case of Crosby the rest of the team often either matched or over performs the results with Crosby in the two last cup years.

None of this is definitive of course because there are many variables in play. But it presents a statistical picture that counters the argument that Crosby through his leadership and two-way play is lifting the Pens to success while McDavid fails to do so for the Oilers. What it shows is that when neither player was on the ice, the Pens as a team did better than the Oilers.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Crosby certainly isn't ahead of Lidstrom.

Lol you being serious?

 

[Fourier]

For me its not a matter of tearing down Crosby at all. He is a generational talent and I have no issue if people think he is at the same level or even better than McDavid at this point. One could easily argue for example that Crosby longevity puts him ahead of McDavid until McDavid shows he can sustain his level of play well into the future. My concern is more with the core argument in favour of Crosby being leadership, his "two-way play", or the fact that Crosby is a "winner".

 

[dukeofjive]

99 pages and still not 1 person able to tell me why is gretzky the better player, when mark messier won a cup in edmonton after he left and 1 in new york...

crickets

 

[Video Nasty]

99 pages and still not 1 person able to tell me why is gretzky the better player, when mark messier won a cup in edmonton after he left and 1 in new york...

crickets

An obvious truth needs no elaboration.

 

[dukeofjive]

An obvious truth needs no elaboration.

But this thread claims crosby is the better player because of more cups, so messier is the best right...

 

[I am Bettman]

Is prime Crosby better than the LA version of Gretzky who couldn’t win a cup? Either Crosby is better than LA Gretz, or this line of reasoning is faulty.