McDavid becomes the 3rd player in NHL history to score 40 points in a playoff run - after Wayne and Mario

[Sentinel]

McDavid didn’t have a point in a 5-1 win last night

Please expand.

 

[bobholly39]

Also, Gordie was the best defensive winger for a long time. He wasn’t just scoring points. He played a two-way game that Wayne and Mario didn’t.

Was he the best defensive winger? I feel sometimes that's overstated.

He was really good defensively - and comparing to Lemieux or Gretzky or McDavid defense is an advantage. But was he all-time good defensively? As good as a Bergeron or Gainey or such? I don't think so

 

[Hockeyholic]

McDavid didn't have a point. If Florida holds him pointless in gam 7, they are in good shape. Unless Draisaitl has finally woken up.

 

[bobholly39]

If McDavid completes the greatest comeback of all time is he the greatest of all time, 97>99?

Definitely not

BUT - if he has a huge game 7 - im thinking at least 3 points - id legitimately be open to considering whether this the single biggest achievement in hockey history.

Above any peak Gretzky season/playoff.

He already has 11 points in finals - record all time is 13. So this would give him 14. Also 0-3 comeback and a huge game 7. Also 45 points, #2 all time behind Gretzkys 47 (which is probably out of reach, sincehe'd need 5 to tie it, 6 to beat it).

So is he above Gretzky all time? Definetely not. But id be open to considering this the greatest single peak accomplishment in hockey.

 

[Sentinel]

Definitely not

BUT - if he has a huge game 7 - im thinking at least 3 points - id legitimately be open to considering whether this the single biggest achievement in hockey history.

Above any peak Gretzky season/playoff.

He already has 11 points in finals - record all time is 13. So this would give him 14. Also 0-3 comeback and a huge game 7. Also 45 points, #2 all time behind Gretzkys 47 (which is probably out of reach, sincehe'd need 5 to tie it, 6 to beat it).

So is he above Gretzky all time? Definetely not. But id be open to considering this the greatest single peak accomplishment in hockey.

Not sure about this. He didn't win the Art Ross for the season and likely will not win the Hart. If you're only talking playoffs, he is still behind Gretzky for the all-time record in way more games. Although a reverse sweep will certainly be a nice story, one would question why was his team three games down to begin with.

 

[bobholly39]

Not sure about this. He didn't win the Art Ross for the season and likely will not win the Hart. If you're only talking playoffs, he is still behind Gretzky for the all-time record in way more games. Although a reverse sweep will certainly be a nice story, one would question why was his team three games down to begin with.

No need to combine regular season. To clarify - what i mean is:

If today you're asked to rank the greatest accomplishments in hockey history, you probably rank Gretzkys 215 points, or 92 goals, or something by Orr or Lemieux or even Gretzkys best playoff runs near the top.

I think McDavid's current playoff run - especially if he caps it off by a huge game 7 win and performance - will be in contention for top of that list.

Nobody will care "why were they down 0-3". They will just be wowed by the insane comeback. A huge game 7 is necessary to cap it off though to rank that high

 

[Hockeyholic]

There's nothing McDavid can do to surpass Gretzky. The great one is on a tier of his own.

That's not a knick against McDavid either. Gretzky was just that GOOD.

 

[Video Nasty]

You know you’re dealing with what could be the second greatest player ever when he’s expected to win every Hart and Art Ross year in and year out. The detractors don’t seem to realize they’re making their own bed when they bring that argument up.

 

[GMR]

Was he the best defensive winger? I feel sometimes that's overstated.

He was really good defensively - and comparing to Lemieux or Gretzky or McDavid defense is an advantage. But was he all-time good defensively? As good as a Bergeron or Gainey or such? I don't think so

I was talking for his era. He's regarded as a great two-way winger. I don't know how he'd compare to Gainey. Bergeron is a center, with obviously more responsibilities.

 

[HolyHagelin]

The gap still looks to be 30 points. So what is the argument now?

I give you credit, you are committed to this bit. You’re insane and totally wrong, but do you. Go down with that ship.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I give you credit, you are committed to this bit. You’re insane and totally wrong, but do you. Go down with that ship.

Majority of the hockey world goes down with that ship. Dont be fooled by the hoh section on one forum site

Majority of the hockey world goes down with that ship. Dont be fooled by the hoh section on one forum site. Look no further than the hockey news updated top 75 players of all time.

 

[HolyHagelin]

If he was healthy he would have Gretzky type of numbers who is the consensus goat.

Also you’re not taking the injuries serious lol. In the prime of his career he got cancer and injuries derailing his numbers. He wouldve had even more numbers if he wasnt injured and got cancer through his 20s and 30s in the prime of his career lol. In his best season he still had 6 games to be played he would’ve without a doubt been the second ever to get a 200pt season.

although Lemieux wasn’t as good of an all around player that Howe was, he still wasn’t no scrub defensively and he is way better offensively. Put Lemieux in howes league and he’s putting up 150pts every season- he would be like an alien they would’ve never seen anything like it up until that point.

If you add on the games that Howe played over Lemieux (852) and put lemieuxs average down half a point per game (0.5)accounting for him getting older and going into his 40s he would still have a 1.38ppg. And he would have an extra 1176 points. 1723+1175 =2898 and we have a new nhl record for points supassing Gretzkys 2857 lol.

Lemieux came back after being off for 3 years to still put up 76pts in 43 games for a 1.76 ppg. If he played the full 82 games then he would’ve had 144 points, 23 more than jagr who won the art ross that year.

170 games played out of 410 after the 3 years off where anyone else would have just retired for good and put up 229 pts for a 1.34ppg while injured nonstop and unable to stay healthy in puck era where scoring was way down. In 2002/2003 he came 8th in total scoring despite only playing 67 games. Had he played the full season he would’ve had 111pts placing him above Peter forsberg for the year as a 37 year old. Arguably howes best season in 1952/1953 where he had 95 pts in 70 games- he had. 1.35 ppg average as a 25 year old in the prime of his career.

Can keep going but I think I proved my point.

Injuries and illness do not add to a player’s all time case. They quite obviously detract from it. Lemieux missing all that time is a clear negative. You only proved that you are not capable of rationality.

 

[DitchMarner]

Was he the best defensive winger? I feel sometimes that's overstated.

He was really good defensively - and comparing to Lemieux or Gretzky or McDavid defense is an advantage. But was he all-time good defensively? As good as a Bergeron or Gainey or such? I don't think so

When people pump up his defense, I think they're really thinking more along the lines of "overall impact on game play and goal differential at even strength."

I don't want to use the word "lazy," but for whatever reason, people seem to just throw out the word "defense" as a generic blanket term when they want to say that one player had a greater impact on overall game play and the score (at ES) than another.

Howe was a big man in his era and kind of a freak athlete, and I'm sure he leveraged those qualities and his skill level into dominating the opposition. When I think of "defense," I tend to think of things like good defensive positioning, keen awareness and anticipation, shot blocking, pass interceptions, knocking guys off the puck. Obviously I didn't watch him, but it seems people who did generally emphasize that he made a tremendous general impact on game play and the score at even strength. I don't know if many actually believe he was as good at things like positioning and reads as guys like Bergeron, Fedorov and numerous other very good defensive forwards.

According to data, Gretzky actually did really well in terms of driving goal differential at even strength in the right direction in his best years as well even though he wasn't great at classic defense. I believe the data and witnesses suggest Lemieux wasn't as good as those two or Orr in that regard.

 

[67 others]

Was he the best defensive winger? I feel sometimes that's overstated.

He was really good defensively - and comparing to Lemieux or Gretzky or McDavid defense is an advantage. But was he all-time good defensively? As good as a Bergeron or Gainey or such? I don't think so

He was a strong two way winger who was more than just solid.

Think Hart Mark Messier and Lindros intangibles and grit and ability to run through opposition and be very hard to play against and who you do not want to go into the corners with, with better scoring....almost every year. 1990 Messier was "normal" Gordie Howe

 

[authentic]

When people pump up his defense, I think they're really thinking more along the lines of "overall impact on game play and goal differential at even strength."

I don't want to use the word "lazy," but for whatever reason, people seem to just throw out the word "defense" as a generic blanket term when they want to say that one player had a greater impact on overall game play and the score (at ES) than another.

Howe was a big man in his era and kind of a freak athlete, and I'm sure he leveraged those qualities and his skill level into dominating the opposition. When I think of "defense," I tend to think of things like good defensive positioning, keen awareness and anticipation, shot blocking, pass interceptions, knocking guys off the puck. Obviously I didn't watch him, but it seems people who did generally emphasize that he made a tremendous general impact on game play and the score at even strength. I don't know if many actually believe he was as good at things like positioning and reads as guys like Bergeron, Fedorov and numerous other very good defensive forwards.

According to data, Gretzky actually did really well in terms of driving goal differential at even strength in the right direction in his best years as well even though he wasn't great at classic defense. I believe the data and witnesses suggest Lemieux wasn't as good as those two or Orr in that regard.

The teams they played on were a huge reason for this.

 

[frontsfan67]

Injuries and illness do not add to a player’s all time case. They quite obviously detract from it. Lemieux missing all that time is a clear negative. You only proved that you are not capable of rationality.

clearly we think differently. im done arguing with the crowd that seems to think players from the 40s, 50s, 60s would do anything in todays game lol. Lemieux and Gretzky would excel. It’s a typical case of “my generation is better than yours” and it’s clearly not going anywhere.

 

[Letsdothis]

clearly we think differently. im done arguing with the crowd that seems to think players from the 40s, 50s, 60s would do anything in todays game lol. Lemieux and Gretzky would excel. It’s a typical case of “my generation is better than yours” and it’s clearly not going anywhere.

I doubt there are many here who share a generation with Bobby Orr let alone Gordie Howe.

 

[norrisnick]

clearly we think differently. im done arguing with the crowd that seems to think players from the 40s, 50s, 60s would do anything in todays game lol. Lemieux and Gretzky would excel. It’s a typical case of “my generation is better than yours” and it’s clearly not going anywhere.

And that generation is the 80s because that's when all the goals were scored!

 

[pi314]

Pointless arguments comparing players of different eras, with different equipment, and different rules.

Never change HF.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Was he the best defensive winger? I feel sometimes that's overstated.

He was really good defensively - and comparing to Lemieux or Gretzky or McDavid defense is an advantage. But was he all-time good defensively? As good as a Bergeron or Gainey or such? I don't think so

Agreed. Howe was very good defensively, and clearly better than Gretzky or Lemieux, but there's no way he was at the level of Gainey or Lehtinen. Nor have I ever read anything that suggested that he was the best defensive winger in the NHL. Maybe he was at the level of Kurri, Hossa or early-career (winger) Messier - which is still ridiculous for a six time Art Ross trophy winner.

 

[HolyHagelin]

clearly we think differently. im done arguing with the crowd that seems to think players from the 40s, 50s, 60s would do anything in todays game lol. Lemieux and Gretzky would excel. It’s a typical case of “my generation is better than yours” and it’s clearly not going anywhere.

Whichever point you think you are refuting it isn’t my post that you quoted. Lemieux was “the guy” when i started watching hockey. A player’s most important ability is his availability.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Whichever point you think you are refuting it isn’t my post that you quoted. Lemieux was “the guy” when i started watching hockey. A player’s most important ability is his availability.

Your delusional

 

[HolyHagelin]

Your delusional

My delusional what?

 

[Beukeboom]

Injuries and illness do not add to a player’s all time case. They quite obviously detract from it. Lemieux missing all that time is a clear negative. You only proved that you are not capable of rationality.

I think staying injury free is a bit of an artform, that should count towards your overall achievment. Lidstrom was fantastic at it, so it's not only fluke or genetics.

In terms of Mario's cancer, that's obviously not included in this sentiment, however, people mention it like he had it half his career. It was during one season, and as incredible as that comeback was, it most likely did not affect him any other year.

From what I know, Mario was fairly injury free until a herniated disc in the winter of 90 when he missed the last months of that season + off season surgey kept him away huge chunks the following year. Now this is perhaps something they would have been more careful with nowadays? If he had rested instead of playing through it for as long as he probably did, it might never have been such an issue? A herniated disc is generally not a huge issue if one allows it to heal. This is of course on the Penguins too. Teams did not take care of their players back then.

I guess my point is that Mario's injuries started in his 6th season, and by his 6th season Wayne had already finished #1 in the scoring race (tied his rookie year) 6 times, and broken most NHL season/streak related records. Let's not forget that Mario's first Art in 87-88 most likely was due to Gretzky missing time that season. Wayne had a substantially higher PPG.

Anyway, as not to digress: the tricky part here is Wayne. Because Connor does not have a Wayne to compete against. But in the end, actual performance still has to trump what could have beens.

 

[sensfan4lifee]

Definitely not

BUT - if he has a huge game 7 - im thinking at least 3 points - id legitimately be open to considering whether this the single biggest achievement in hockey history.

Above any peak Gretzky season/playoff.

He already has 11 points in finals - record all time is 13. So this would give him 14. Also 0-3 comeback and a huge game 7. Also 45 points, #2 all time behind Gretzkys 47 (which is probably out of reach, sincehe'd need 5 to tie it, 6 to beat it).

So is he above Gretzky all time? Definetely not. But id be open to considering this the greatest single peak accomplishment in hockey.

What no not even close its a good season and its amazing what he's doing and I think he's making a case to jump ahead of howe, but saying this run is greater than any of Gretzkys 200 point seasons? no not even close, what he's doing is special and I'm a believer but lets not get ahead of things here.