Is McDavid Top 10 For You All Time Already? If Not How Much More Does He Have to do?

[Breakfast of Champs]

McDavid could be the Dionne of our generation, is Dionne a top 10 player of all time?

He's better than Dionne though by quite a bit.

Exactly. The NHL exists to ENTERTAIN the hockey fan. Not to give Stanley Cups. McDavid is one of the most beautiful players of all time... Scoring video game goals all season long. The best goal scorer in the NHL.

No one cares about the Dave Anderchyucks, Bernie Nichols, or Austin Matthews of the day.

Entertainment is one part of it, but fans also want their teams to win. When discussing the greatest , entertainment is not the only factor.

Bure would be top 10 in this case.

He is also objectively, not the best or most proficient goal scorer in the NHL. He was for one season, but that may be an outlier (to be seen). Matthews is the best goal scorer in the NHL and before him Ovi

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Obsession with old time players is always hilarious.

Grats you were the best dman out of 24 dmen in the league.

John Canada who scored 15 goals against his sons in the first game ever on a frozen pond in the 1800s was probably the greatest of all time if you think about it.

 

[John Mandalorian]

No. And he’s still behind Kobe Bryant.

 

[Calderon]

If they were all the same age and I had to choose which one I would take to build my team:
Mario Lemieux
Wayne Gretzky
McDavid
Crosby
Jagr
Draisatil
Esposito
Lafleur
Bossy
Matthews
Ovechkin
Messier
Sakic
Yzerman
Malkin
Lindros

Good of you to make sure no-one thinks you meant the likes of Claude, Jocelyn or Brent.

 

[Connor McConnor]

This applies to most top end players.

But not top 10 player of all time, if you want to be at the very top of the list, you have to be someone special.

Bernie Nicholls scored 70 and had 150pts in a season, and had 1200 points for his career. Not even in the hall of fame. Not the best example, but 1200 points doesn't get him to the hall of fame; McDavid without leading Oilers to a Cup would not even begin the conversation of whether he makes top 10 all time.

How many Harts and Art Ross did Nichols win? Silly argument and there is no comparable. Jagr would have never won if he didn’t team up with Mario. Ovi went on a cinderella run where he wasn’t even the best player on his team. Both are widely considered top 10

 

[AppreciateHockey]

I think it would reflect badly on both McDavid and Draisaitl if they never win any team trophy. I mean two Hart trophy winners on the same team not even winning a President, Division or Conference trophy. Let alone a cup.

McDavid clearly has the talent to be top 5 all time but all time greatness contains winning. Intangibles like leadership, perseverance, adapting, doing whatever the team needs from you even if it does not show up on the scoreboard.

Oilers winning 12 straight with McDavid doing dirty stuff along the boards impresses me more that the 150 points with 70 on the powerplay.

 

[crowfish]

McDavid could be the Dionne of our generation, is Dionne a top 10 player of all time?

Dionne:
1348 games played
1x Ross
2x Pearson
-dogshit in the playoffs

McDavid:
608 games played
3x Hart
5x Ross
4x Pearson
-2nd highest ppg playoffs in his era

Putting these 2 names in the same sentence is an insult to the collective intelligence of all hockey fans. It's almost as dumb as people comparing Bernie Nicholl's 150-point season to McDavids.

 

[Auston Marlander]

He's top 5 skill, maybe even top 2. But skill alone doesn't do it, he'll need longevity to be an all time great, and I have no doubt he does this for another 10ish years. The only question will be do his legs last, if he loses his speed a major part of his game would be gone, and speed seems to be the first thing players lose with age.

 

[Coffey]

Dionne:
1348 games played
1x Ross
2x Pearson
-dogshit in the playoffs

McDavid:
608 games played
3x Hart
5x Ross
4x Pearson
-2nd highest ppg playoffs in his era

Putting these 2 names in the same sentence is an insult to the collective intelligence of all hockey fans. It's almost as dumb as people comparing Bernie Nicholl's 150-point season to McDavids.

People will toss out any name and try to compare it to McDavid. Lack of common sense understanding of quality of competition. Dogshit opinions all around.

DAE MCDAVID = ANDREYCHUK?

 

[PaulD]

Like it or not Championships matter.
Greatest of all times lists......always include great players with great championships games.
Just the way it is.

So McDavid? Still in pursuit.

Oilers and he will get there. A cup is coming.

 

[PaulD]

So a Cup is the only thing that defines a player's worth? Beliveau should be ahead of Lemieux and Gretzky then.

No it doesn't.
But not winning even one keeps you out of the exclusive club.
just the way it is.

 

[57special]

nope.
not winning even one keeps you out of the exclusive club though.
just the way it is.

Yup, very exclusive club we are talking about. You don't get in unless you win Cups, otherwise, it's just...nice. Not legendary.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I generally appreciate your takes, especially when it comes to historical but this is downright absurd. To think that NHL talent is lesser now because Canadians aren’t as prevalent (this was always going to happen given population differences) makes no sense to me. Unless you’re an elitist and think that Canadians are just inherently better at hockey without considering other factors, the league has more talent now than ever.

People repeat this ad nauseam without any proof. You can't just add up the population numbers of every country participating in the NHL and declare things are better now than ever. It is way more complicated than that, and the honest attempts to quantify it have shown that the league likely doesn't have more talent now than ever.

 

[kevsh]

Dionne:
1348 games played
1x Ross
2x Pearson
-dogshit in the playoffs

"Dogshit" wtf?

Do your homework next time.
Of all the Kings teams that made the playoffs during his time there maybe 2 that were not terrible (as in ~.500 or worse). He played as many playoff games post 30 as he did before. Remember, the early 80s when 4/5 division teams made it (one season the Kings won 24 games, still made the cut).

We talk about the West Coast bias? Imagine the 70s/80s when there was no social media, no message boards, no NHL Network and no Saturday afternoon games on national American television. The Kings may as well have been playing in Switzerland.

In any case, Dionne was a phenomenal hockey player by any measure (2nd all-time in points until Gretzky came along, He's still #6 in goals & points). Judging from how he never gets mentioned at all in any "best ever" discussions, he's still criminally underrated. He just had the unfortunate luck of playing on some very bad Kings teams playing in obscurity.

 

[crowfish]

"Dogshit" wtf?

Do your homework next time.
Of all the Kings teams that made the playoffs during his time there maybe 2 that were not terrible (as in ~.500 or worse). He played as many playoff games post 30 as he did before. Remember, the early 80s when 4/5 division teams made it (one season the Kings won 24 games, still made the cut).

We talk about the West Coast bias? Imagine the 70s/80s when there was no social media, no message boards, no NHL Network and no Saturday afternoon games on national American television. The Kings may as well have been playing in Switzerland.

In any case, Dionne was a phenomenal hockey player by any measure (2nd all-time in points until Gretzky came along, He's still #6 in goals & points). Judging from how he never gets mentioned at all in any "best ever" discussions, he's still criminally underrated. He just had the unfortunate luck of playing on some very bad Kings teams playing in obscurity.

I did my research just fine.

45 points in 49 games -19 (in the highest scoring era ever)

His regular season was ppg was 1.31, and it dropped to .92 in the playoffs; yes, that is dogshit, sorry.

Yup, very exclusive club we are talking about. You don't get in unless you win Cups, otherwise, it's just...nice. Not legendary.

Who will be considered more of a legend in 20 years, Toews or McDavid?

 

[Connor McConnor]

People repeat this ad nauseam without any proof. You can't just add up the population numbers of every country participating in the NHL and declare things are better now than ever. It is way more complicated than that, and the honest attempts to quantify it have shown that the league likely doesn't have more talent now than ever.

Go look at the bottom 6 of teams in the past.
Or the defensive corps outside the top 3-4. People use your old head argument without any proof either, don’t need a high horse argument without you providing anything that disputes it

 

[BraveCanadian]

Go look at the bottom 6 of teams in the past.
Or the defensive corps outside the top 3-4. People use your old head argument without any proof either, don’t need a high horse argument without you providing anything that disputes it

Estimating the size of the NHL's talent pool (1950-2023)

Your characterization of hockey in Canada in 1900 is not true. Either you don't have any knowledge of this, or you're not being honest. There was hockey being played, and it was already an important part of Canadian culture....but it looked very different. Infrastructure and transportation were...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I did my research just fine.

45 points in 49 games -19 (in the highest scoring era ever)

His regular season was ppg was 1.31, and it dropped to .92 in the playoffs; yes, that is dogshit, sorry.



Who will be considered more of a legend in 20 years, Toews or McDavid?

15 or 20 years ago, I spent about a week reading newspapers from the 1970's and 1980's to learn more about Dionne's playoff performance. It was bad. In the most memorable quote, one of the writers said something like "you'd need a high-powered microscope to detect Dionne's performance on the ice".

I don't care that Dionne never won the Stanley Cup. Given the quality of his team, that would have been (almost) impossible. But a ~35% drop in production is inexcusable. That's among the biggest drops (among star players) in NHL history.

As I've mentioned in a few other threads, McDavid has already scored more points in the playoffs than Dionne, in fewer games, in a lower scoring era. It's an embarrassing comparison.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Orr essentially retired at 26 and is considered top 4.

(Not sure if mcdavid is top 10 yet, but just saying this argument may not Hold up)

Recently, on the History forum, the question came up - why is Bobby Orr ranked in the top four, but McDavid isn't? After all, the gap between them is only about 50 regular season games.

The answer:

1) Orr did things that nobody in NHL history has done (either before or since). He set all-time records. Orr is the only defenseman to lead the NHL in scoring (which he did twice). He holds the record for most Norris trophies all-time. He's the only defenseman in NHL history to win multiple Conn Smythe trophies. And he's one of only two defensemen to win multiple Hart trophies (and the only one since the creation of the Norris trophy). McDavid's trophy case is impressive, and he's starting to move past the Jagr/Crosby/Ovechkin tier (depending on which trophies are included). But he hasn't separated himself the way that Orr did.

2) Orr was an all-time great playoff performer. He was clearly the best player on two Stanley Cup winning teams (he won the Conn Smythe trophy twice). He was probably the best player on another Stanley Cup finalist. Ever when his teams lost, he was usually the best player. McDavid has been excellent in the playoffs the past two years, but we need to see more and/or deeper runs from McDavid before we can compare him to a multiple Conn Smythe winner.

3) Orr was an excellent defensive defenseman. This is supported by statistical evidence (looking at the Bruins' goal differential when he was on vs off the ice - no other player in history had such a big impact on their team). It's also supported by reading accounts of Orr's defensive skill, written during his career. And it's fairly obvious from watching him play. McDavid's critics exaggerate his (supposed) defensive inadequacies, but he's not exactly Patrice Bergeron either.

I agree that Orr and McDavid have played close to the same number of regular season games. But (with no disrespect to McDavid, who appears on track for 5th place all-time) he simply didn't accomplish as much as Bobby Orr in that time.

 

[Coffey]

he simply didn't accomplish as much as Bobby Orr in that time.

Not counting cups, who else has achieved as much as McDavid in their first 8 years of playing?

 

[wetcoast]

No it doesn't.
But not winning even one keeps you out of the exclusive club.
just the way it is.

This just goes to show how absurd SC counting is as teams win SCs not any single player and in a larger league obviously there will be a greater amount of excellent to elite players that won't win a SC.

McDavid has had 2 excellent playoff runs the last 2 years and will most likely have many more but some people here will keep him out of the top 10 when he has double Art Ross and Hart trophies as well as a let's say 1.29 PPG playoff resume compared to others in contention?

Absolutely bonkers.

 

[wetcoast]

Recently, on the History forum, the question came up - why is Bobby Orr ranked in the top four, but McDavid isn't? After all, the gap between them is only about 50 regular season games.

The answer:

1) Orr did things that nobody in NHL history has done (either before or since). He set all-time records. Orr is the only defenseman to lead the NHL in scoring (which he did twice). He holds the record for most Norris trophies all-time. He's the only defenseman in NHL history to win multiple Conn Smythe trophies. And he's one of only two defensemen to win multiple Hart trophies (and the only one since the creation of the Norris trophy). McDavid's trophy case is impressive, and he's starting to move past the Jagr/Crosby/Ovechkin tier (depending on which trophies are included). But he hasn't separated himself the way that Orr did.

2) Orr was an all-time great playoff performer. He was clearly the best player on two Stanley Cup winning teams (he won the Conn Smythe trophy twice). He was probably the best player on another Stanley Cup finalist. Ever when his teams lost, he was usually the best player. McDavid has been excellent in the playoffs the past two years, but we need to see more and/or deeper runs from McDavid before we can compare him to a multiple Conn Smythe winner.

3) Orr was an excellent defensive defenseman. This is supported by statistical evidence (looking at the Bruins' goal differential when he was on vs off the ice - no other player in history had such a big impact on their team). It's also supported by reading accounts of Orr's defensive skill, written during his career. And it's fairly obvious from watching him play. McDavid's critics exaggerate his (supposed) defensive inadequacies, but he's not exactly Patrice Bergeron either.

I agree that Orr and McDavid have played close to the same number of regular season games. But (with no disrespect to McDavid, who appears on track for 5th place all-time) he simply didn't accomplish as much as Bobby Orr in that time.

Agree with most of this but 2 points here.

First it seems that some people have the Big 4 as fixed and seemingly a higher bar than actually having more all time value than say Orr or Mario is at play.fornthe record I think Mario's resume is the weakest of the Big 4 and is certainly within reach.

My second point though is that we are talking top 10 so his career should be compared to those in the 7,8,9,10 range and not Orr.

At some point the number of Art Ross and Hart trophies and top 3,5 finishes just becomes overwhelming when compared to the guys at 7,8,9,10 right?

 

[PaulD]

This just goes to show how absurd SC counting is as teams win SCs not any single player and in a larger league obviously there will be a greater amount of excellent to elite players that won't win a SC.

McDavid has had 2 excellent playoff runs the last 2 years and will most likely have many more but some people here will keep him out of the top 10 when he has double Art Ross and Hart trophies as well as a let's say 1.29 PPG playoff resume compared to others in contention?

Absolutely bonkers.

Winning the Cup kicks you up a notch ....regardless of how super natural you already are. Especially if you are the Con Smythe winner while doing it.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Not counting cups, who else has achieved as much as McDavid in their first 8 years of playing?

I haven't put together a list , but it would be a short one. Gretzky and Orr are obvious. Probably Lemieux, unless you really penalize him for missed games. I'm not sure if there's anybody else who would clearly be ahead of McDavid through eight years.

 

[wetcoast]

Winning the Cup kicks you up a notch ....regardless of how super natural you already are. Especially if you are the Con Smythe winner while doing it.

Sure if guys are close but like I said McDavid might finish with maybe 15 top 3 Hart and Art Ross finishes and an elite individual playoff resume even with the SCs that's not kicking up a notch difference the enormity of McDavids resume at some point will be too large and that point is already getting close.

Guy Lafleur is ranked around 25 ish and he only has 6 elite seasons.