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

[GreatGonzo]

Crosby won his third cup with the Penguins shortly before his 30th birthday, scoring 27 points in 23 games, while winning the Conn Smythe trophy.

I'm not understanding your point. Crosby did the same thing at an earlier age, arguably with less talented teams than the powerhouse Red Wings of the 90s and early 2000s.

Clearly I wasn’t being serious….

There is no point. You are arguing with an AI generated anti-Crosby bot who has spent the past 13 years with every single one of his posts being targeting Crosby in Crosby threads.

Look at that, your back and you came back to throw shade at me? Not surprised, clearly you had nothing better I do with your time then deal with another “anti-Crosby bot.”

Should I post their head to head match ups again so you can whine about how unfair they are for multiple pages?..

 

[Gurglesons]

Disingenuous? You don't say...


<------- The Point ---------

Gurglesons

Yzerman didn’t win cups in his 20s so he’s a bad leader I guess.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It's wild how disengnious your arguments are.

Nuance and perspective are important.

It's funny to see this thread continuing to be complete forced obliviousness and endless straw men arguments for literal days.

The Crosby hate must run deep with you.

Well, not must. The Crosby hate is painfully obvious to anyone who doesn't feel equally as ignorant.

You clearly still have no idea what that word means. You just enjoy using it because you think it makes you feel distinguished.

Imagine having to call someone a “hater” when you can’t form or even represent an argument well enough to be taken seriously?

It’s more “painfully obvious” that you can’t debate and need to resort to the hater card.

 

[norrisnick]

Yzerman didn’t win cups in his 20s so he’s a bad leader I guess.

Welcome to the talking points of the late 80s early 90s when he was left off Team Canada (though Keenan is just a moron). Remember all the shit about Ovechkin and how he wasn't the type of guy you could win with? And then he won and it went away? That was Yzerman. And then he won 3 Cups and Olympic gold and was the leader of leaders.

Discussion about leadership, by fans, is nothing but circular nonsense.

 

[Gurglesons]

Welcome to the talking points of the late 80s early 90s when he was left off Team Canada (though Keenan is just a moron). Remember all the shit about Ovechkin and how he wasn't the type of guy you could win with? And then he won and it went away? That was Yzerman. And then he won 3 Cups and Olympic gold and was the leader of leaders.

Discussion about leadership, by fans, is nothing but circular nonsense.

I mean, the cool thing about hockey opinions is you are entitled to feel the way you want.

Players are judged on the entirety of their careers which is why Crosby is viewed by many in the 5-10 spot.

McDavid if he never wins a championship probably won’t be similar to Jagr who won two and has 5 Art Rosses.

I still think you have a clear dislike of Sid which is influencing you endless arguing against him as the seasons change every year.

 

[norrisnick]

I mean, the cool thing about hockey opinions is you are entitled to feel the way you want.

Players are judged on the entirety of their careers which is why Crosby is viewed by many in the 5-10 spot.

McDavid if he never wins a championship probably won’t be similar to Jagr who won two and has 5 Art Rosses.

I still think you have a clear dislike of Sid which is influencing you endless arguing against him as the seasons change every year.

That's why I've been on hockey forums for 20 odd years.

That's cool.

Championships as a gatekeeper in discussing individual players is monumentally silly. Mainly because the standard isn't applied consistently.

I think your love of Crosby far outweighs my dislike for him.

 

[Johnny Rifle]

Clearly I wasn’t being serious….

I missed the sarcasm, it's hard to know exactly what side of the issue you stand on this.

I'm basing my opinion on mostly what I see watching hockey for the last 35 years. Right now I believe they are neck and neck, and I feel that they belong on a similar tier right behind the Big Four.

Ignore the advanced statistics and WAR and expected goals and use your eyes. I see Crosby do things I don't see other players attempt with his stick and with his legs, and I see McDavid do things with his speed that have never been done. Give Crosby a slight bump for this three Cups and they are pretty level.

As for low-key dominance, I feel that it's the perfect phrase to describe his game. He does some spectacular things with deflections and his incredible wrist and hand strength; but the majority of his dominance is just puck possession in the offensive zone. He is capable of highlight reel goals, but his consistency over time is what sets him apart.

 

[Gurglesons]

That's why I've been on hockey forums for 20 odd years.

That's cool.

Championships as a gatekeeper in discussing individual players is monumentally silly. Mainly because the standard isn't applied consistently.
View attachment 899336


I think your love of Crosby far outweighs my dislike for him.

I voted for McDavid over Crosby.

You’re countless straw man arguments trying to diminish the legacy of Crosby as an all time great is where the issue is.

At this point McDavid has had the better individual contributions in the regular season and playoffs over Sid.

The issue is legacy is defined by championships.

I find it hard to believe McDavid doesn’t finish his career with an argument over Sid.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

That's why I've been on hockey forums for 20 odd years.

That's cool.

Championships as a gatekeeper in discussing individual players is monumentally silly. Mainly because the standard isn't applied consistently.
View attachment 899336


I think your love of Crosby far outweighs my dislike for him.

No one ever had Toews above Crosby. There were many lists that had Toews way too high, even #2, but never above Crosby. You're making up an example to prove your point

 

[wetcoast]

It’s as simple as you NEED pace and adjusted stats to make an argument….all while claiming that “stat/trophy counting” is meaningless….

Once again the strawman Gonzo knows more than what I actually said BS comes around.

I didn't say that trophies were meaningless, I have repeatedly said excellence is important other that strictly trophy count and then dismiss other great performances is the problem here.

Of course trophies matter well expect if they are SC's to you at least.

because that makes a lot of sense. The raw totals don’t help your argument so you go more towards the “predicted” ones. Even thought they are massively flawed.

Raw totals are just that an account for the season of who scored more, pace over a large number of games is equally relevant. and adjustments even more so as 1000 yen doesn't equal 1000 American greenbacks.

But hey if scoring goes up even more like 2 goals per game more then McDavid slips down in history?....that's not how things work.

Yes I posted those numbers to show that when it came to the finals, crosbys “weak teammates” and Malkin had a bigger impact in the finals than Crosby did. Sure, Edmonton may have had “bigger guns” than the ‘09 Pens, but many posters still love to leave out the fact that those same players failed to show up in the finals.

It's funny how all those NHL coaches get ift wrong then but tgameplanning to shut down Crosby eh?

His SC final counting stats aren't great but then also look at other players not so great moments as well but instead you are selective in your method and thus can't be taken seriously.

 

[norrisnick]

No one ever had Toews above Crosby. There were many lists that had Toews way too high, even #2, but never above Crosby. You're making up an example to prove your point

Do some of you guys not know that the internet never forgets?

Crosby vs. Toews Historical Context

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT A DIG AT TOEWS ABILITIES WHATSOEVER A question that has been bugging me for a while. Like the disclaimer says, this is not a dig at Toews in any way. But I am curious if there has ever been such a debate between 2 players seemingly so far apart for the crown of "best" or...

forums.hfboards.com

First thread I found, and that one is from BEFORE the Hawks' 3rd cup.

 

[Plural]

I think McDavid is better, not by a lot, but better. Same tier players though.

Crosby is such an accomplished player and unlike many in this thread, I think his winning resume has weight. It's not something that will lift him on "another tier" in the sense this thread is about. So if McDavid continues this level of hockey for few more years, he's probably going to sway majority opinion to "different tier".

But as of now, same tier for me. But McDavid starting to separate himself. Ovechkin is closer to Sid than Sid is to McDavid.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I missed the sarcasm, it's hard to know exactly what side of the issue you stand on this.

I'm basing my opinion on mostly what I see watching hockey for the last 35 years. Right now I believe they are neck and neck, and I feel that they belong on a similar tier right behind the Big Four.

Ignore the advanced statistics and WAR and expected goals and use your eyes. I see Crosby do things I don't see other players attempt with his stick and with his legs, and I see McDavid do things with his speed that have never been done. Give Crosby a slight bump for this three Cups and they are pretty level.

As for low-key dominance, I feel that it's the perfect phrase to describe his game. He does some spectacular things with deflections and his incredible wrist and hand strength; but the majority of his dominance is just puck possession in the offensive zone. He is capable of highlight reel goals, but his consistency over time is what sets him apart.

I understand. Should have been more clear. My point was just to poke fun at the idea that “leadership” and being a “winner” is just an empty, baseless argument. Yzerman clearly started winning cups when he was surrounded by HOFers along with other talent.

I mean neck and neck, same tier, same tier but McDavid/Crosby being slightly ahead, I get it. It’s just the posters that choose “leadership” and cups to say he’s the BETTER player, not having the better career, but player.

 

[wetcoast]

The chart shows that McDavid has dominated more in half the time and the number will seemingly only go up. I don’t think I’m holding any of these charts up as gospel. I made a passing comment, but yeah, I prefer the one steeped in reality over the one with staggeringly flawed adjusted stats.

I know what I’m watching when I see McDavid play night and night out. A player who reminds me of Gretzky and Lemieux with his ability to dominate and only comes around every 30-40 years.

If I’m being honest, I’ve been reminded of them more by Malkin in stretches than Crosby ever has.

But sure, hand wave away all of McDavid’s accomplishments because of Crosby’s pace and adjusted stats nonsense.

Literally no one is doing this, you and the other 2 that make up the 3 (insert label here) constantly make intellectually dishonest arguments and even guys who take McDavid are pretty much not on board with your Rent free nonsensical arguments.

Simply counting up points isn't how all time rankings work.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Once again the strawman Gonzo knows more than what I actually said BS comes around.

I didn't say that trophies were meaningless, I have repeatedly said excellence is important other that strictly trophy count and then dismiss other great performances is the problem here.

Of course trophies matter well expect if they are SC's to you at least.


Raw totals are just that an account for the season of who scored more, pace over a large number of games is equally relevant. and adjustments even more so as 1000 yen doesn't equal 1000 American greenbacks.

But hey if scoring goes up even more like 2 goals per game more then McDavid slips down in history?....that's not how things work.

It's funny how all those NHL coaches get ift wrong then but tgameplanning to shut down Crosby eh?

His SC final counting stats aren't great but then also look at other players not so great moments as well but instead you are selective in your method and thus can't be taken seriously.

True or false: Crosbys peak is closer to McDavid only using “adjusted” stats and pace….

Then why are you against counting stats and trophies? I’m almost positive you have openly said you don’t agree with that.

You are missing all the posts that like to portray Crosby as the “hero” in his first finals, and that his stats don’t properly tell how important his impact was in that series. And yes, they exist.

Literally no one is doing this, you and the other 2 that make up the 3 (insert label here) constantly make intellectually dishonest arguments and even guys who take McDavid are pretty much not on board with your Rent free nonsensical arguments.

Simply counting up points isn't how all time rankings work.

Literally, many are doing this get a clue.

 

[wetcoast]

I think the simpletons were the players in the early 80s that Gretzky victimized routinely.

Actually more so posters that don't understand that each season is slightly different from others and sometimes vastly different otherwise we would have the 3 amigos saying Bernie Nicholls had one of the best all time seasons, which is apparently where their selective use of stats probably might end but who knows how far the rabbit hole they will go.

I wonder what changed in Crosbys leadership style since 2017?

Has he tried a different leadership method the past 2 seasons where the pens have not qualified for the playoffs?

Look up the word context perhaps?

You are trying to be too cute by half.

 

[norrisnick]

I voted for McDavid over Crosby.

You’re countless straw man arguments trying to diminish the legacy of Crosby as an all time great is where the issue is.

At this point McDavid has had the better individual contributions in the regular season and playoffs over Sid.

The issue is legacy is defined by championships.

I find it hard to believe McDavid doesn’t finish his career with an argument over Sid.

That's cool.

What strawman? I cannot diminish something that is there and true. I don't have that power. I can however point out things that aren't there or true. I'll always fight the good fight against the imaginary and the silly.

Good thing this is a thread comparing individuals and not teams.

And championships are won by teams.

Again, cool.

 

[wetcoast]

Odd... the 30s is when Yzerman became a winning leader.

Also, hasn't a bulk of this thread been praising Crosby for his nigh unprecedented longevity and ability to remain at an elite level?

Well it's true and no other player in NHL history has had 19 consecutive seasons at a PPG+.

But you are going to find some way to argue this no doubt eh?

 

[wetcoast]

Clearly I wasn’t being serious….

Don't worry no one takes you seriously......

Look at that, your back and you came back to throw shade at me? Not surprised, clearly you had nothing better I do with your time then deal with another “anti-Crosby bot.”

Should I post their head to head match ups again so you can whine about how unfair they are for multiple pages?..

I'm sure you will once again like it means anything.

Just make sure to make the same point about some future younger superstar who owns McDavid past most players peak years though or is that too much to ask?

Heck I bet right now there is some lesser player who has better h2h stats against McDavid the thing is to draw any conclusions from such trivia is trivial.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Actually more so posters that don't understand that each season is slightly different from others and sometimes vastly different otherwise we would have the 3 amigos saying Bernie Nicholls had one of the best all time seasons, which is apparently where their selective use of stats probably might end but who knows how far the rabbit hole they will go.


Look up the word context perhaps?

You are trying to be too cute by half.

i don’t think you believe in the magic leadership fairy so no need to interject into this conversation

 

[Johnny Rifle]

I mean neck and neck, same tier, same tier but McDavid/Crosby being slightly ahead, I get it. It’s just the posters that choose “leadership” and cups to say he’s the BETTER player, not having the better career, but player.

To be fair to me, most "Tiers" and Mt. Rushmore lists are based upon careers, not the raw talent. It's like recasting Mr. Rushmore based upon the debate skills of the Presidents instead of the most consequential ones.

Moments make the man, and Crosby has a career full of them. McDavid has plenty of time to catch up, but strictly based upon career accomplishments instead of talent, he's still behind Crosby and Ovechkin.

 

[norrisnick]

Well it's true and no other player in NHL history has had 19 consecutive seasons at a PPG+.

But you are going to find some way to argue this no doubt eh?

Why would I argue that point?

 

[GreatGonzo]

Don't worry no one takes you seriously......

I'm sure you will once again like it means anything.

Just make sure to make the same point about some future younger superstar who owns McDavid past most players peak years though or is that too much to ask?

Heck I bet right now there is some lesser player who has better h2h stats against McDavid the thing is to draw any conclusions from such trivia is trivial.

Coming from you…that’s rich.

What are you babbling about? Like what is this nonsense? The head to head match ups were posted because one poster said that it hadn’t been posted due to the fear of McDavid looking bad….turns out, McDavid owned the match up pretty easily. Now….it didn’t go any farther than that…until @Gurglesons starting complaining about how the stats weren’t fair because of the age difference….clearly not understanding that you can’t match them up in the same age because it never happened…

I then posted their head to head from 2017 and 2018, 2 years in which Crosby was still widely considered one…and for many, THE better and best player in the league still. He then complained that Crosby was still “to old” and that it had to be 18 vs 18 or 25 vs 25…once again not understanding that it was impossible.

Maybe get the context down before attacking me on it? That’s a start buddy

To be fair to me, most "Tiers" and Mt. Rushmore lists are based upon careers, not the raw talent. It's like recasting Mr. Rushmore based upon the debate skills of the Presidents instead of the most consequential ones.

Moments make the man, and Crosby has a career full of them. McDavid has plenty of time to catch up, but strictly based upon career accomplishments instead of talent, he's still behind Crosby and Ovechkin.

I agree, their careers are at completely different points.

I mean the “career accomplishment” part is the argument, because McDavid is already quite accomplished for the stage he is in his career. Like his resume rivals the greats. It’s not just talent with him.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Post in thread 'Brian Leetch Or Scott Niedermayer?'
Brian Leetch Or Scott Niedermayer?

It’s like a f***ing disease

 

[wetcoast]

True or false: Crosbys peak is closer to McDavid only using “adjusted” stats and pace….

Sure its peak McDavid just like Ovi has the better pure peak but that's not what this thread is about.

but the difference isn't as big as you think it is because Crosby was downright dominant in 10-11 before his injury just like in 12-13 and there just aren't any good reasons to think that his peak would have been that much less than McDavid's had he not been injured.

We saw what we saw and know what we know it's not like if not for the injuries that Crosby wouldn't reasonably have 2 more art Ross trophies and 2 more Harts right?

The 11-12 season I'll set aside but does anyone really think that Crosby wouldn't have had a great season without injury?


Anyway the argument for Crosby is 19 straight years of elite play and that's at least on the same tier as 9 from McDavid.

Then why are you against counting stats and trophies? I’m almost positive you have openly said you don’t agree with that.

Well it wouldn't be the first time that you were wrong about what I said and I have been clear, I value the whole picture to strictly trophy count or SC count is just plain lazy.

Case in point is Justin Williams winning the Conn Smythe weh n Doughty and Kopitar were almost certainly more important to that Kings SC win that year.

You are missing all the posts that like to portray Crosby as the “hero” in his first finals, and that his stats don’t properly tell how important his impact was in that series. And yes, they exist.


Literally, many are doing this get a clue.

Do you see me agreeing with the SC only counters...nope.

Winning does matter, more to others than to me and I have been very clear that I expect McDavid to pass Crosby even without a SC win.

He just needs more than 9 seasons to Crosby's 19.

Why would I argue that point?

Well now we have some progress at least and a threshold has been reached...for now.