CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 40,047
- 14,733
Can you name that single dimension without implying many others?
McDavid nearing 1000 points at 27 years old
- Thread starter Grate n Colorful Oz
- Start date
McFlash97
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 7,689
- 6,841
Assuming McDavid has a good career going forward, whether or not he ends up winning a cup I doubt will affect his position in the list of all time greats much. And I'm pretty sure he will win a cup, if he doesn't accomplish it as a top player, I think he'll keep grinding until his mid 50s in a lesser role to get one 
If cup wins were the only thing that separated him from Gretzky (and Lemieux) at that point, then it could matter, but honestly I don't think he'll have any chance at surpassing Gretzky. Lemieux might be within reach if he has absolutely phenomenal latter half of his career. Then I could see McDavid vs Lemieux becoming a thing, with the usual health asterix thing attached to Mario and people debating whether McDavid's longer peak is enough to make him no2.
The argument that the league is so much better these days doesn't hold water to me - while it's true if looking at the playerbase as a whole, the best players were always very good. Gretzky's dominance was just so insane and Kurri and Messier were great players themselves (and went on to prove that without Gretzky), but nowhere close Wayne. Also Mario came along and he bridged the gap nicely from the crazy 80s into the 90s when the league was already a very modern one. Mario dominated against players who went on to play well into the 2000s and even 2010s. I mean Jagr in his 40s was still a very good player and Selänne had top10-top20 worthy seasons in the late 2000s and as late as 2011 - when he was 40. And peak Mario vs peak Jagr or peak Selänne was not even close.
Anyway reaching 1000 points so young is a great achievement and McDavid already belongs somewhere among the greats. As an aside, personally I'm really happy we're back to higher scoring hockey where a 80 point season is not completing for Art Ross.
If cup wins were the only thing that separated him from Gretzky (and Lemieux) at that point, then it could matter, but honestly I don't think he'll have any chance at surpassing Gretzky. Lemieux might be within reach if he has absolutely phenomenal latter half of his career. Then I could see McDavid vs Lemieux becoming a thing, with the usual health asterix thing attached to Mario and people debating whether McDavid's longer peak is enough to make him no2.
The argument that the league is so much better these days doesn't hold water to me - while it's true if looking at the playerbase as a whole, the best players were always very good. Gretzky's dominance was just so insane and Kurri and Messier were great players themselves (and went on to prove that without Gretzky), but nowhere close Wayne. Also Mario came along and he bridged the gap nicely from the crazy 80s into the 90s when the league was already a very modern one. Mario dominated against players who went on to play well into the 2000s and even 2010s. I mean Jagr in his 40s was still a very good player and Selänne had top10-top20 worthy seasons in the late 2000s and as late as 2011 - when he was 40. And peak Mario vs peak Jagr or peak Selänne was not even close.
Anyway reaching 1000 points so young is a great achievement and McDavid already belongs somewhere among the greats. As an aside, personally I'm really happy we're back to higher scoring hockey where a 80 point season is not completing for Art Ross.
SeanMoneyHands
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2019
- 15,274
- 14,610
Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 5,654
- 9,871
Feel the same about Crosby winning a third Art Ross.
Iggys Dome
Not allowed to say the “R-Word” (rebuild)
Will be interesting to see how the next 9 years go. Once he starts to lose his legs, his scoring will most likely drop pretty drastically.
UpHere
Feelin' it
- Jun 16, 2009
- 702
- 200
this post is not smart nor even approaching witty - why would you bother?
Skillwise he is better than Crosby… careerwise absolutely not… and we will see.And people claimed he wasn't as good as Crosby
But as far as the complete skill set is concerned he is one of the best NHL players have ever played the game of hockey. Definitely for me at the same tier with Mario.
While i have always argued with people comparing Crosby or Ovechkin with Jagr, seeing both of them a bit below, here i do not have any problem with it. In my opinion if he stays healthy he will break into Top3 scoring leaders of all time and let’s see if he can do even more.
KCC
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2007
- 19,050
- 10,344
Coffee
Take one step towards the direction you want to go
- Nov 12, 2021
- 9,172
- 8,008
There’s always going to be haters bro. It’s a good thing, not everyone wants to see great people shine.
JFedol
Registered User
The number/history nerd side of me wants to see McDavid go pointless against Nashville (though that probably means my Oilers lose) and then get point 1,000 on an assist against the Leafs, which would be against his childhood team and give him an eye-pleasing 340-660 stat line.
Kerberos
Hound of Hades
- Nov 4, 2021
- 4,471
- 7,216
You can hope I suppose. Hasn't really had his legs for the past year and a half (in addition to whatever core injuries he's been dealing with) and he's still dominated the league.
- Jun 13, 2010
- 42,703
- 21,550
I don't think the argument will ever be Lemieux vs McDavid. McDavid is good, but Mario (and Wayne) are still next level. McDavid hits 200pts, then we can talk.Assuming McDavid has a good career going forward, whether or not he ends up winning a cup I doubt will affect his position in the list of all time greats much. And I'm pretty sure he will win a cup, if he doesn't accomplish it as a top player, I think he'll keep grinding until his mid 50s in a lesser role to get one
If cup wins were the only thing that separated him from Gretzky (and Lemieux) at that point, then it could matter, but honestly I don't think he'll have any chance at surpassing Gretzky. Lemieux might be within reach if he has absolutely phenomenal latter half of his career. Then I could see McDavid vs Lemieux becoming a thing, with the usual health asterix thing attached to Mario and people debating whether McDavid's longer peak is enough to make him no2.
The argument that the league is so much better these days doesn't hold water to me - while it's true if looking at the playerbase as a whole, the best players were always very good. Gretzky's dominance was just so insane and Kurri and Messier were great players themselves (and went on to prove that without Gretzky), but nowhere close Wayne. Also Mario came along and he bridged the gap nicely from the crazy 80s into the 90s when the league was already a very modern one. Mario dominated against players who went on to play well into the 2000s and even 2010s. I mean Jagr in his 40s was still a very good player and Selänne had top10-top20 worthy seasons in the late 2000s and as late as 2011 - when he was 40. And peak Mario vs peak Jagr or peak Selänne was not even close.
Anyway reaching 1000 points so young is a great achievement and McDavid already belongs somewhere among the greats. As an aside, personally I'm really happy we're back to higher scoring hockey where a 80 point season is not completing for Art Ross.
You believe the heavy majority of people believe Crosby ends up the greater player all-time even if McDavid doesn't win a cup..?
Considering the media hounded Ovechkin for the better part of a decade because he hadn't won a Cup? Yes...I do.
ETA: You'd be surprised what happens in another 5 years if the scoring pace slows down and McDavid still hasn't won a Cup. The media will start turning on him about having a tarnished legacy without a Cup, etc etc.
