McDavid in the 80s

[CMDEADLY]

McDavid isn’t even better than Pavel Bure.
Thinking he’s even close to Gretzky or Lemieux is Embarrassing.

He is faster than Bure but sure man. I'll bite.

You are just as bad as those two. The game hae evolved simple as that.

 

[Sojourn]

No the techniques and strategies caught up to lidstrom.

That doesn’t make sense, because if that were the case he wouldn’t have been as good as he was. A player isn’t going to stand out if the way they play and their effectiveness doesn’t set them apart.

 

[Machinehead]

No the techniques and strategies caught up to lidstrom.

He won a Norris less than 10 years ago.....

 

[Sojourn]

He is faster than Bure but sure man. I'll bite.

You are just as bad as those two. The game hae evolved simple as that.

This I learned today: evolution means everything in the past sucked.

 

[CMDEADLY]

He won a Norris less than 10 years ago.....

Yes and get what I'm saying.

The defensive strategies have gotten better and Lidstrom being the best doesn't remove the talent around him getting better. He also won that Norris because he stole it from Weber.

 

[authentic]

Saying it doesn’t make it so.

Of course it’s debatable, and most experts would likely laugh at you for suggesting it.

I disagree entirely. The game wasn't even close to what it is today. Gretzky himself knows guys like Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin would easily outscore him if they went back to his day, there's nothing wrong with admitting it, because it's blatantly obvious.

 

[CMDEADLY]

This I learned today: evolution means everything in the past sucked.

No it means that the past isn't better than the present. You thinking I said otherwise means you didn't read.

 

[Sojourn]

Yes and get what I'm saying.

The defensive strategies have gotten better and Lidstrom being the best doesn't remove the talent around him getting better. He also won that Norris because he stole it from Weber.

By your logic, in ten years everyone is going to be significantly better than the current players. Teams will be significantly better.

 

[authentic]

McDavid isn’t even better than Pavel Bure.
Thinking he’s even close to Gretzky or Lemieux is Embarrassing.

Laughable.

 

[Sojourn]

No it means that the past isn't better than the present. You thinking I said otherwise means you didn't read.

It’s called hyperbole, but that is actually what you’re suggesting.

Your entire argument essentially comes down to “OMG, everyone today is so amazing. The players and teams in the past can’t compete.”

I’m paraphrasing, but that’s your argument.

 

[CMDEADLY]

By your logic, in ten years everyone is going to be significantly better than the current players. Teams will be significantly better.

If the young guns of today are any indication absolutely.

 

[authentic]

By your logic, in ten years everyone is going to be significantly better than the current players. Teams will be significantly better.

They'll be better. The significant part happens progressively with each passing decade, it's really not a tough concept to grasp.

 

[Machinehead]

Yes and get what I'm saying.

The defensive strategies have gotten better and Lidstrom being the best doesn't remove the talent around him getting better. He also won that Norris because he stole it from Weber.

Boy, you're just a barrel of f***ing monkeys aren't you?

 

[Negan4Coach]

A better scenario is McDavid transported back to the 1920's

He dunks all over every player so hard every game that the entire sport is labled "A Vaudeville-esque spectacle of grotesqueries conducted upon a sheet of ice fit for only the most cretinous members of our society"

The NHL is purchased by Barnum and Bailey and for a few years has McDavid skating circles around lions, women with beards and other assorted freaks before it is mercifully disbanded during the great depression.

Wayne Gretzky winds up shining shoes in the Edmonton airport for a living.

 

[CMDEADLY]

It’s called hyperbole, but that is actually what you’re suggesting.

Your entire argument essentially comes down to “OMG, everyone today is so amazing. The players and teams in the past can’t compete.”

I’m paraphrasing, but that’s your argument.

It's also not, my argument is the best players of today would match the best players of the past.

Once again you didn't read and need to defend your precious.

 

[Sojourn]

I disagree entirely. The game wasn't even close to what is today. Gretzky himself knows guys like Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin would easily outscore him if they went back to his day, there's nothing wrong with admitting it, because it's blatantly obvious.

You make such a convincing argument, with such convincing evidence.

Minus the evidence. Or the convincing part. But you have the argument, at least, so you’ve got that going for you.

 

[Braunbaer]

I also wonder what McDavid would do in an era in which goalies got beat by low and visible 50 mph slapshots from the blueline.

 

[CMDEADLY]

Boy, you're just a barrel of ****ing monkeys aren't you?

That was Weber's Norris in 2012 dude. He got it as a lifetime achievement award, and that was understood on HF at the time.

 

[Machinehead]

That was Weber's Norris in 2012 dude. He got it as a lifetime achievement award, and that was understood on HF at the time.

Wrong year.

Weber only had 48 points the year Lidstrom won.

 

[authentic]

I mean look at these crappy defensemen Gretzky was scoring on.

Ray Bourque - bum, Chris Chelios - 50 years old even back then, Larry Robinson - funny looking, Rod Langway - never heard of him, Denis Potvin - sucks.

Imagine he was playing these guys every game? Not even close. Have you even watched NHL games from Gretzky's peak? I sincerely doubt you have if you're comparing the defense he faced night in and night out to that of modern superstars.

 

[DFC]

I disagree entirely. The game wasn't even close to what it is today. Gretzky himself knows guys like Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin would easily outscore him if they went back to his day, there's nothing wrong with admitting it, because it's blatantly obvious.

A lot of that is because of advances in equipment and sports science, not necessarily the raw athlete. Give Lemieux's today's equipment, and today's conditioning coaches, and he would, yet again, dwarf everyone else's numbers.

 

[CMDEADLY]

Wrong year.

Weber only had 48 points the year Lidstrom won.

Points=/=Best defensemen. Jesus christ.

 

[Machinehead]

Points=/=Best defensemen. Jesus christ.

Ok so Lidstrom had 16 more points, let's put that aside.

You're telling me Weber was better defensively than Nick f***ing Lidstrom? Let alone enough to make up a 16 point gap?

 

[CMDEADLY]

A lot of that is because of advances in equipment and sports science, not necessarily the raw athlete. Give Lemieux's today's equipment, and today's conditioning coaches, and he would, yet again, dwarf everyone else's numbers.

He'd match Mcdavid and Sid in his prime that's for sure.

 

[authentic]