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

[19 for president]

I think you could argue that he is one of the top 10 most skilled players or top 10 peak to ever play but in terms saying he has a top 10 ranked career no.

He is going to need more playoff success and a little longevity to get into that 10 career ranking. I think he has to hit the 1500pt marker before you can then make an argument with PPG vs overall points for why he should be included over guys that have scored more.

If he gets to 1000 games and is at 1500+points I think at that point you can start talking top 10 all time career.

 

[crowfish]

I think you could argue that he is one of the top 10 most skilled players or top 10 peak to ever play but in terms saying he has a top 10 ranked career no.

He is going to need more playoff success and a little longevity to get into that 10 career ranking. I think he has to hit the 1500pt marker before you can then make an argument with PPG vs overall points for why he should be included over guys that have scored more.

If he gets to 1000 games and is at 1500+points I think at that point you can start talking top 10 all time career.

If your peak is better than the longevity of entire guy's careers then you do not need any longevity to pass them on all-time ranking lists.

I'll use Yzerman for example. He played 22 seasons and won the MVP zero times, he received top 5 votes only twice in his career.

McDavid has received top 5 MVP votes for 8 consecutive seasons... Do I really need to watch McDavid play another 300 games to conclude what is already obvious? The answer is no.

 

[AvalancheFan19]

I think you could argue that he is one of the top 10 most skilled players or top 10 peak to ever play but in terms saying he has a top 10 ranked career no.

He is going to need more playoff success and a little longevity to get into that 10 career ranking. I think he has to hit the 1500pt marker before you can then make an argument with PPG vs overall points for why he should be included over guys that have scored more.

If he gets to 1000 games and is at 1500+points I think at that point you can start talking top 10 all time career.

Start talking he says

 

[Number8]

he gotta do one thing

View attachment 632275

That would make him the greatest player with the most First Round Playoff exits.

Not sure that gets him Top Ten Player overall status, but it is a strategy I guess.

 

[AvalancheFan19]

Does him winning a CS with 40 plus points in a losing cause help his ranking?

Legitimately asking.

Absolutely. It shows that the Stanley Cup is a team achievement and the Conn Smythe is an individual trophy for the best player in the playoffs. This isn't basketball or a QB in football. Connor McDavid nor any other hockey player in the past, present or future can do a better job of helping his team win. He has done the unthinkable, yet again. This is why the Stanley Cup argument is and always will be silly.

I have thought McDavid to be better than Crosby for about 1-2 seasons now. These playoffs, regardless of games 6 and potentially 7, will not make a difference. It's solidified now.

 

[5Hollywood5]

Gretzky
Lemieux
McDavid

 

[CanadienShark]

Easily cemented within top 10. I would argue already top 5.

 

[lextune]

This playoff run has cemented him into the top 10 for me. Probably closer to top 5.

Breaking and/or challenging Gretzky single playoff/series records is absolutely amazing, next level, type of stuff.

 

[WalterLundy]

This will be a long post so disclaimer

I’ll leave Howe and Orr out of this as I never got to see either play (but both are deserving of top 4 status). Out of the players I have gotten to see since I started watching in 1979 the clear best have been Gretzky, Lemieux and McDavid in that order. His career is still relatively young at only 9 years but if we compare to Gretzky and Lemieux through 9 seasons as well it can give us a better picture of what we could end up with when it’s all said and done. Since Gretzky and Lemieux played in the 80s and 90s I’ll be using adjusted stats here as McDavid playing 30 years later needs some degree of contextualization. Not that they are the end all be all but it helps in this particular comparison with McDavid added. Also bear in mind that nobody else is close to McDavid through 9 seasons from 1980 to present day so these are indeed the clear top three when adjusted. All three players are age 19-27 here as well.

Historical NHL averages:
EVG: 2.24, PPG: 0.72, SHG: 0.10

Historical playoff league averages:
EVG: 2.03, PPG: 0.74, SHG: 0.10

Connor McDavid:
Regular season
15-16: 45 GP: 19 G, 37 A, 56 P
16-17: 82 GP: 33 G, 80 A, 113 P
17-18: 82 GP: 42 G, 71 A, 113 P
18-19: 78 GP: 42 G, 80 A, 122 P
19-20: 64 GP: 36 G, 68 A, 104 P
20-21: 56 GP: 35 G, 79 A, 114 P
21-22: 80 GP: 43 G, 83 A, 126 P
22-23: 82 GP: 64 G, 92 A, 156 P
23-24: 76 GP: 32 G, 102 A, 134 P
Totals:
645 GP: 346 G, 692 A, 1038 P (1.61)

Playoffs
16-17: 13 GP: 6 G, 5 A, 11 PTS
19-20: 4 GP: 5 G, 4 A, 9 PTS
20-21: 4 GP: 1 G, 3 A, 4 PTS
21-22: 16 GP: 9 G, 21 A, 30 PTS
22-23: 12 GP: 8 G, 11 A, 19 PTS
23-24: 22 GP: 8 G, 36 A, 44 PTS
Totals:
72 GP: 37 G, 80 A, 117 PTS (1.63)

Combined (Regular and Playoffs)
717 GP: 383 G, 772 A, 1155 P (1.61)

Awards
3 Hart, 5 Ross, 4 Ted Lindsay (12 total)
*potential cup and smythe in the balance

Mario Lemieux:
Regular season
84-85: 73 GP: 34 G, 45 A, 79 P
85-86: 79 GP: 37 G, 70 A, 107 P
86-87: 63 GP: 45 G, 44 A, 89 P
87-88: 77 GP: 55 G, 74 A, 129 P
88-89: 76 GP: 66 G, 90 A, 156 P
89-90: 59 GP: 37 G, 64 A, 101 P
90-91: 26 GP: 16 G, 24 A, 40 P
91-92: 64 GP: 38 G, 73 A, 111 P
92-93: 60 GP: 58 G, 74 A, 132 P
Totals:
577 GP: 386 G, 558 A, 944 PTS (1.64)

Playoffs
88-89: 11 GP: 9 G, 6 A, 15 P
90-91: 23 GP: 13 G, 24 A, 37 P
91-92: 15 GP: 13 G, 16 A, 29 P
92-93: 11 GP: 6 G, 8 A, 14 P
Totals:
60 GP: 41 G, 54 A, 95 PTS (1.58)

Combined (Regular and Playoffs)
637 GP: 427 G, 612 A, 1039 P (1.63)

Awards
2 Hart, 4 Ross, 2 Cups, 2 Smythe, 3 Ted Lindsay (13 total)

Wayne Gretzky:
Regular season
79-80: 79 GP: 44 G, 76 A, 120 P
80-81: 80 GP: 43 G, 86 A, 129 P
81-82: 80 GP: 70 G, 92 A, 162 P
82-83: 80 GP: 58 G, 100 A, 158 P
83-84: 74 GP: 68 G, 91 A, 159 P
84-85: 80 GP: 57 G, 106 A, 163 P
85-86: 80 GP: 40 G, 125 A, 165 P
86-87: 79 GP: 51 G, 101 A, 152 P
87-88: 64 GP: 33 G, 87 A, 120 P
Totals:
696 GP: 464 G, 864 A, 1328 PTS (1.91)

Playoffs
79-80: 3 GP: 2 G, 1 A, 3 PTS
80-81: 9 GP: 5 G, 10 A, 15 PTS
81-82: 5 GP: 5 G, 6 A, 11 PTS
82-83: 16 GP: 9 G, 19 A, 28 PTS
83-84: 19 GP: 12 G, 21 A, 33 PTS
84-85: 18 GP: 13 G, 22 A, 35 PTS
85-86: 10 GP: 7 G, 11 A, 18 PTS
86-87: 21 GP: 5 G, 27 A, 32 PTS
87-88: 19 GP: 9 G, 22 A, 31 PTS
Totals:
120 GP: 67 G, 139 A, 206 PTS (1.72)

Combined (Regular and Playoffs)
816 GP: 531 G, 1003 A, 1534 PTS (1.88)

Awards
8 Hart, 7 Ross (8 scoring leads), 5 Ted Lindsay, 4 Cups, 2 Smythe (26 total)

As you can see Gretzky is so far ahead and impossible for anyone to catch but through 9 seasons McDavid and Lemieux are virtually identical. Points per game is a 99% match and awards are only one apart with McDavid having more regular season hardware and a chance to pass/match with a cup and/or smythe. Lemieux still has the higher absolute peak and may end up always having that over McDavid but through the same point in their careers as a whole they are equals when era is accounted for. Nobody else is close to this level under Gretzky and I’ve checked with era adjustment. It shows that for career McDavid will almost certainly be 2-4 all time depending on who you favor. Second all time being very possible with good longevity and winning. These are however the top 3 of the last 45 years undoubtedly. Nobody else is close through the same point.

 

[19 for president]

If your peak is better than the longevity of entire guy's careers then you do not need any longevity to pass them on all-time ranking lists.

I'll use Yzerman for example. He played 22 seasons and won the MVP zero times, he received top 5 votes only twice in his career.

McDavid has received top 5 MVP votes for 8 consecutive seasons... Do I really need to watch McDavid play another 300 games to conclude what is already obvious? The answer is no.

To me career is different than skill. I would agree that McDavid is top 10 skill/talent of all time already. He passes the eye test.

Example: Hasek is the best goalie I've ever seen play, but I would take Roy's career over his.

If he stops today he isn't top 100 all time in NHL scoring (very close yes). Maybe 1500 is too high for bottom of the top 10 but I don't think wanting him to be a top 30 all time scorer (1,349) before declaring him a top 10 career is crazy. At this pace that is 2 maybe 3 more seasons for him.

With all this said I don't see McDavid slowing down anytime soon and fully expect him to be up there with Gretzky, Orr, and Mario in the debate for best of all time when his career is done. I also fully expect him to win a few cups as well.

 

[tfwnogf]

His resume is already top 10; 5 art rosses (only Gretzky, Howe and Lemieux have more), 4 Ted Lindsays (only Gretzky has more), 3 Harts (only Gretzky, Howe and Shore have more).

Despite how many players there have been since nhl's inception, there are very few at the top who win multiple awards and dominate the field like McDavid. It requires not only immense talent, but stamina to play the game at a high level for a number of seasons. He's accomplished so much already. He needs a cup to silence the haters tho.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

One metric that I track is total Hart votes earned over the course of a player's career (normalized so that each year is worth the same number of votes).

Here's where McDavid ranked after last year (from WWII to present):

1	Wayne Gretzky	4.99
2	Gordie Howe	3.40
3	Mario Lemieux	2.43
4	Bobby Orr	1.98
5	Sidney Crosby	1.92
6	Bobby Hull	1.63
7	Jaromir Jagr	1.61
8	Jean Beliveau	1.61
9	Connor McDavid	1.59
10	Alexander Ovechkin	1.59
11	Phil Esposito	1.54
12	Bobby Clarke	1.53
13	Dominik Hasek	1.22
14	Mark Messier	1.15
15	Stan Mikita	1.15
16	Guy Lafleur	1.14
17	Maurice Richard (partial)	1.14
18	Bryan Trottier	0.99
19	Andy Bathgate	0.94
20	Evgeni Malkin	0.82

McDavid was already 9th all-time (in a logjam with, in chronological order, Beliveau, Hull, Jagr, and Ovechkin).

We know that McDavid finished 3rd this year (there's a small chance he ranked higher, but it seems safe to assume he was third). Once the voting results are released next week, McDavid will definitely rank at least 6th all-time (behind the Big Four plus Crosby). There's a chance he'll jump ahead of Crosby for 5th place (unlikely, but not impossible).

Prior to this year, it was possible to argue that McDavid was lacking a "signature" playoff run. I don't know how these final one or two games will play out, but McDavid's current postseason is better than anything that Jagr, Crosby or Ovechkin have ever done in the spring.

He's still only 27. There's a legitimate chance that McDavid will turn the Big Four into the Big Five (which would then separate hockey players from thrash metal bands and accounting firms).

 

[cruisecity]

Him and Lemieux are essentially tied in my eyes for the second spot in terms of impact. So #3 all time at the moment for me.

 

[Video Nasty]

One metric that I track is total Hart votes earned over the course of a player's career (normalized so that each year is worth the same number of votes).

Here's where McDavid ranked after last year (from WWII to present):

1	Wayne Gretzky	4.99
2	Gordie Howe	3.40
3	Mario Lemieux	2.43
4	Bobby Orr	1.98
5	Sidney Crosby	1.92
6	Bobby Hull	1.63
7	Jaromir Jagr	1.61
8	Jean Beliveau	1.61
9	Connor McDavid	1.59
10	Alexander Ovechkin	1.59
11	Phil Esposito	1.54
12	Bobby Clarke	1.53
13	Dominik Hasek	1.22
14	Mark Messier	1.15
15	Stan Mikita	1.15
16	Guy Lafleur	1.14
17	Maurice Richard (partial)	1.14
18	Bryan Trottier	0.99
19	Andy Bathgate	0.94
20	Evgeni Malkin	0.82

McDavid was already 9th all-time (in a logjam with, in chronological order, Beliveau, Hull, Jagr, and Ovechkin).

We know that McDavid finished 3rd this year (there's a small chance he ranked higher, but it seems safe to assume he was third). Once the voting results are released next week, McDavid will definitely rank at least 6th all-time (behind the Big Four plus Crosby). There's a chance he'll jump ahead of Crosby for 5th place (unlikely, but not impossible).

Prior to this year, it was possible to argue that McDavid was lacking a "signature" playoff run. I don't know how these final one or two games will play out, but McDavid's current postseason is better than anything that Jagr, Crosby or Ovechkin have ever done in the spring.

He's still only 27. There's a legitimate chance that McDavid will turn the Big Four into the Big Five (which would then separate hockey players from thrash metal bands and accounting firms).

What does the likely third place finish in the Hart voting bring him to for his new total?

 

[I am Bettman]

So individual players have such a big impact on winning cups even though Wayne, the greatest ever, couldn’t win once he left the Oilers? The oilers even won a cup without him so I’m not sure what some people here are thinking.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

What does the likely third place finish in the Hart voting bring him to for his new total?

From 2000 to 2015 (that's all the data I have with me, on this computer), the average 3rd place finisher earned slightly under 0.3 (with a max of 0.41 and a min of 0.14).

McDavid should end up right around 1.90 after the results are released next week. He's probably slightly below Crosby, but it's still possible that he could be in 5th place already. Either way - extraordinary for someone who still hasn't even turned 28.

 

[Video Nasty]

From 2000 to 2015 (that's all the data I have with me, on this computer), the average 3rd place finisher earned slightly under 0.3 (with a max of 0.41 and a min of 0.14).

McDavid should end up right around 1.90 after the results are released next week. He's probably slightly below Crosby, but it's still possible that he could be in 5th place already. Either way - extraordinary for someone who still hasn't even turned 28.

Wow. Seems inevitable that he finishes no lower than 3rd when it’s all said and done.

 

[Czechboy]

Ask me Tuesday morning!

 

[wetcoast]

Right after Crosby mostly due to 6 team league

While I think Crosby has a more plausible hockey career case than Mario having him over Howe at this point is a really hot take but I do get the 6 team argument and the 06 era does often get over rated at times.

No that this is definitive but the Red Wings won a SC with Howe missing all but 1 period of the playoffs that year.

Does that happen to nay other top 10 player winning a SC post lockout and salary cap era?

I highly doubt it so it's something to consider.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

While I think Crosby has a more plausible hockey career case than Mario having him over Howe at this point is a really hot take but I do get the 6 team argument and the 06 era does often get over rated at times.

No that this is definitive but the Red Wings won a SC with Howe missing all but 1 period of the playoffs that year.

Does that happen to nay other top 10 player winning a SC post lockout and salary cap era?

I highly doubt it so it's something to consider.

It’s interesting to me that Lemieux is the weak link to you, I’ve not seen that before tbh

 

[jigglysquishy]

It’s interesting to me that Lemieux is the weak link to you, I’ve not seen that before tbh

This is by far the common opinion for those who have researched the area.

Howe over Lemieux is functionally canon in the HoH lists.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

This is by far the common opinion for those who have researched the area.

Howe over Lemieux is functionally canon in the HoH lists.

Fair enough, I don’t go to that board

 

[LTIR]

Ask me Tuesday morning!

This.
For me he would jump from outside of top 50 all time to top 5 if he wins a cup.

Let's not forget that Malkin wasn't even counted as a top 100 of all time.

 

[Fantomas]

#5.

 

[wetcoast]

It’s interesting to me that Lemieux is the weak link to you, I’ve not seen that before tbh

He didn't tilt the ice like others with a claim to the Big 4 and his 5 on 5 play, despite his video game numbers simply leave something to be desired IMO.