You might want to leave this part out since McDavid has only hit 135 points once. Makes you sound like a Crosby fan...
McDavid’s performance over the past 500 games
- Thread starter Video Nasty
- Start date
It means they ultimately lost to a better team.
WalterLundy
Registered User
Since the 2024-25 season is in progress I can’t count those games yet from HockeyReference’s adjusted stat page but I took McDavid from his rookie year to last year (2015-16 to 2023-24) and have his era adjusted totals of 361 G, 694 A and 1055 points in 681 era adjusted games. In reality it was 645 games but that site adjusts each season in history to 82 games so he gets an extra 26 from 2021 and 10 from 2020. Every player on this list gets extra games (and numbers) from lockout seasons or seasons of different schedule lengths in the past.
With that said here are the 10 players I posted in the initial post you responded to at McDavid’s 681 games played era adjusted. He still dominates to a very large degree. I also included Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Howe and Jagr for some legends comparisons at the same games played. The only players that outdo McDavid statistically when era adjusted are Gretzky and Lemieux. That’s it. Quite remarkable. Gretzky’s separation from Lemieux is also the same separation Lemieux himself has on McDavid (Lemieux at 91% of Gretzky and McDavid 91% of Lemieux). Definitely in the process of creating a big 5 rather than a big 4 all time.
McDavid: 361 G, 694 A, 1055 P (1.55)
Crosby: 348 G, 622 A, 970 P (1.42)
Ovechkin: 465 G, 412 A, 877 P (1.29)
Malkin: 343 G, 522 A, 865 P (1.27)
Draisaitl: 336 G, 487 A, 823 P (1.21)
Kucherov: 311 G, 495 A, 806 P (1.18)
Panarin: 271 G, 527 A, 798 P (1.17)
Stamkos: 407 G, 348 A, 755 P (1.11)
Kane: 291 G, 461 A, 752 P (1.10)
MacKinnon: 272 G, 463 A, 735 P (1.08)
Legends:
Gretzky: 453 G, 825 A, 1278 P (1.88)
Lemieux: 479 G, 684 A, 1163 P (1.71)
Jagr: 351 G, 527 A, 878 P (1.29)
Orr: 252 G, 613 A, 865 P (1.27)
Howe: 334 G, 430 A, 764 P (1.12)
So doesn't matter if it is counting stats or adjusted era stats it says the same thing. He is miles above his own era and even the generation before him. But miles below the 2 of 3 top 3 players of all time. And as of right now fits nicely into the top 3 for forwards on current pace. The 3rd of the top 3 is there because of what he did at his position and just how he changed the way the game was played in his day and for the rest of the nhl after him.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,807
- 12,068
Haven't you repeatedly rejected the idea of adjusting for era? Or am I mistaking that?
I happen to agree that McDavid's run is more impressive, but that's because the scoring environment for Lafleur and Esposito (and Gretzky) was wildly different and significantly inflates their stats. If someone disagrees with that manner of adjustment, then I really don't know what the rationale is for saying McDavid's fewer points and way fewer goals in the same number of games is better.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 6,046
- 10,663
You’re mistaken. What I’ve repeatedly expressed is my disdain for using flawed adjusted statistics as a core fact in arguments, as if the projected fabricated numbers really happened, i.e. when some pretend Crosby scored 130-140 points each season during the 2010-2011 through 2012-2013 timeframe, or that 104 points in 2013-2014 comes anywhere close to 153 points in 2022-2023.
He dragged his team from a 3-0 deficit to force a game 7, topping 40+ points and breaking Gretzky’s assist record in a playoff run. Macakinnon’s stats in game 7 are also not very good actually.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,807
- 12,068
Hockey reference adjusts Crosby's 2014 season to 116 points and McDavid's 2023 season to 146 points. As far as lazy points-with-no-context goes, that adjustment seems perfectly reasonable IMO.
Of course, Crosby was a secondary assist merchant that season whereas McDavid was a killer goal scorer, so that ought to have any reasonable hockey fan concluding that McDavid's season is several tiers higher.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 6,046
- 10,663
McDavid is a top five player to ever lace them up. The other guy could have been, but that ship sailed long ago.
TheLegend27
Registered User
MacKinnon has 1 point in four game 7s(power play assist) and is a -3. You’re right he’s around when it matters, namely he’s around a better FO with much better roster construction than the Oilers.
Last edited:
WalterLundy
Registered User
The other guy is the third best penguin I’ve seen I’d say. Mario goes without saying and jags I also believe was better. 1995-2001 Jagr (and even adding in 2006 for 8 seasons) is better than anything Crosby did. He doesn’t have 7-8 seasons when combined to match up to that. It’s much the same with McDavid now since 2018 and he’s still only 27 so it could and will most likely get far worse. I know I may get attacked for this but I think many overrate Crosby even if he is a 6-10 all time lock for skaters. Maybe not overrated overall as a player but definitely as a top end producer.
Luigi Lemieux
Registered User
Nah Crosby would never be considered behind Jagr for second best penguin. Crosby just played his 1300th game and they're practically identical through that point with 1625 points for Jagr and 1622 for Crosby. Only reason Crosby doesn't have 4-5 art rosses himself is some ill timed missed games in seasons he was dominating. Doesn't diminish his actual level of play. Despite that he still has 2 richards, 2 conn smythes, and 1 hart on him. And that's not even getting into attitude issues that Jagr had towards the end of his time with the penguins.
Connor McConnor
Registered User
- Nov 22, 2017
- 5,758
- 6,992
I mean, they got lucky with a Toews trade and a rebuild project in Nichushkin. Makar ended up being a generational dman that they got when they were horrible for 10 years (just like the Oilers were able to get Drai). Hockey is a team sport and a lot of things need to go right to win a Cup in today's game. Edmonton has been close for the past 3 years, a few things going right and they have a Cup as well.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 6,046
- 10,663
Jagr was absolutely better, in terms of peak level of play, but I understand the fascination of Crosby lacing them up for 20+ years with the Penguins and valuing a guy almost as good who has never seemed discontent.
One thing I find remarkable about Crosby’s tenure is that he could play over 1500 games for you guys. Lemieux and Jagr combined for a little over 1700. Extraordinary longevity considering it looked like early retirement for awhile there.
WalterLundy
Registered User
Fair but I’m solely talking prime and peak. To me he was better in that regard.
Luigi Lemieux
Registered User
WalterLundy
Registered User
Absolutely. I only meant peak/prime level of play. He’s going to be the longest tenured captain in history and could have the most points for a single franchise in NHL history. His longevity and consistency is more than you could ever ask for and he is a perfect face of a franchise. We have been blessed in this way for sure. I just think at times people forget how good Jagr was at his best and to me and sometimes Crosby’s “whole package” gets conflated with his top end offensive output/capabilities.
Of course. I’d never argue penguins career or legacy for the two.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 6,046
- 10,663
In regards to how Jagr left on bad terms, what’s the average pulse amongst rational Pittsburgh fans these days? Do they understand that the guy got tired of doing all the lifting during his prime?
WalterLundy
Registered User
Most people I talk hockey with that have a good grip on it understand that fully. I’ve personally always known and understood that. The rational fan here sees it. I’ll be transparent and say that I have always been a huge fan of his game. I got to see him countless times in the late 90s when he was at his best (and in the playoffs when we needed it) and I’ll never forget that. I defend him more than most and may be biased to a degree but so be it haha. The guy has his flaws but overall I never (and most of my friends here) never held anything against him. You’ll still have some sour fans in the fanbase at large and that’ll always be there but right now I feel like most have a fondness and appreciation for him.
So many people have the most stupid takes in here without doing research. It’s almost sad to see.
DitchMarner
What's The Definition of Impressive?
And I actually quite like Kucherov despite being a fan of a rival team and think he's been a tremendous playoff player in general (I tend to like cerebral players who can score), but his Game Seven stats are somehow worse than Marner's.
While the ship that could have helped get McDavid a Cup was never boarded, Which is worse?
I see it as a waste.
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 6,046
- 10,663
Thumbs up the three times Crosby's name appears on the Cup and those two Conn Smythe's lol.
If you take Crosby’s best 500 game stretch from his last 47 games in 05-06 to the first 66 games of 13-14, he had 716 points. If you take the average scoring environment for real goals (not shootout goals) based on how many games he played in each season (so that playing more games in 06-07 than in 11-12 is taken into account for instance), this came under a 2.79 GPG environment. McDavid’s best 500 came under a 3.03 GPG environment based on the same calculations. So adjusting his numbers to McDavid’s time frame would give him an adjusted total of 776 points, or 127 points per 82 games, only 8 points off McDavid’s pace.
Now, PPs being higher early in Crosby’s period meant that top players tended to score more relative to the league, so if we instead look specifically at PP and ES goals per game to make out adjustment (and keep SH points as is because of the small variance), we end up with Crosby’s environment having 0.74 PP goals per game and 1.95 ES goals per game, and McDavid’s environment having 0.61 PP goals per game and 2.33 ES goals per game.
So if we adjust both of them by these numbers we end up with:
Crosby 05-06 to 13-14
434 ES
274 PP
8 SH
716 Total
117 P/82
McDavid adjusted 05-06 to 13-14
436 ES
353 PP
12 SH
801 Total
131 P/82
Crosby adjusted to 17-18 to 24-25
519 ES
226 PP
8SH
753 Total
123 P/82
McDavid from 17-18 to 24-25
521 ES
291 PP
12 SH
824 Total
135 P/82
So McDavid is definitely better, but I do think the difference is overstated by some. It’s interesting to note that their ES numbers are basically identical. It’s the PP that makes a big difference. However, PP scoring among top scorers seems to be higher relative to overall PP goals in recent years, so perhaps this is actually adjusting too low for Crosby, and the goals per game adjustment is better.
Of course the biggest difference is that McDavid wasn’t missing huge chunks of games in between here, and also he’s still as good as ever whereas this is basically right before Crosby’s numbers started decreasing, and McDavid also has another Art Ross before this time period.
