Nathan Mackinnon's legacy is at a pivotal point

[crowfish]

Cup > everything when it comes to superstars. What would Sid or AO be if they didnt have the Cups?

Ovechkin would be right where he currently is, tied with Gretzky for all-time goals, and an all-time NHL legend. Are you claiming people would have forgotten about him if the Caps didn't win the 2018 playoffs?

The only guys that get forgotten about are the overrated ones due to team success (Toews is a good example). Remember when Toews was better than Crosby? That is the sort of Ls people have taken historically by not understanding the concept that team success is not individual. It's great for narratives at the time, but it does not age well. I'll tell you what does age well, true all-time great talents like Ovechkin

 

[landy]

Forget about betting my ass, I wish I could bet my life savings against every take you just wrote

Nathan MacKinnon is drawing dead to have a better all-time perception than Connor McDavid. McDavid has already done things MacKinnon could not and will never do (and we can bet on it if you disagree). Things like leading the league in goals/assists same season. Winning the Art Ross by 40 points more than the next highest non-teammate. Winning the MVP unanimously (AKA the Gretzky and McDavid only club)

MacKinnon is getting badly outscored by McDavid THIS SEASON with a goalie in the net. Remember you are the one saying MacKinnon is close to surpassing him and McDavid is already "falling off". You would think that fact would be devastating to such a claim

And the reason people reference McDavids' "millions of points" in that playoff run is because points are a much more sophisticated way to analyze how great a player is. You will notice Gretzky is 1st all-time in points/game, and yet not top 50 in Stanley Cup wins. Lemieux is 2nd all-time in points/game, and not top 100 in Stanley Cup wins. McDavid is 3rd all-time pts/game, and has never won the Stanley Cup. It's not remotely complicated as a concept: Cups = team stats, Points = individual stats. Players are individuals, not teams, and therefore individual stats/awards will always be more important for measuring ability.

Except win a Cup. If McDavid never wins a Cup, he will go down as the best disappointment in NHL history. Obviously Pat Marroon is not better than McDavid because of his Cups, but if you look at any of the all-time greats, the ones a notch or two below are the Cupless ones.

 

[landy]

Ovechkin would be right where he currently is, tied with Gretzky for all-time goals, and an all-time NHL legend. Are you claiming people would have forgotten about him if the Caps didn't win the 2018 playoffs?

The only guys that get forgotten about are the overrated ones due to team success (Toews is a good example). Remember when Toews was better than Crosby? That is the sort of Ls people have taken historically by not understanding the concept that team success is not individual. It's great for narratives at the time, but it does not age well. I'll tell you what does age well, true all-time great talents like Ovechkin

Youre still referencing guys with Cups. Look at Joe Thornton, Marcel Dionne, Jarome Iginla, Pavelski, Lunqvist, Bure, etc. Theyre all lower than they would be on our lists because of no Cups. McDavid right now is pacing to be the best of that group.

 

[RussianBum86]

He was last year, but ill give you Makar this year.

1. Makar
2. MacKinnon
3. Kucherov
4. Hellebuyck
5. Werenski
6. Draisaitl
7. Eichel
8. Marner
9. McDavid

Less points per game agains than kuch. Less points per game against top 10 teams. Plays and feeds on the bottom feeders last year more than kucherov like the sharks and coyotes. Still couldn't outperform kucherov. He wasnt goodenough to carry his team back to back cups. Makar is the mvp of avs this year not Mack. If Mack was Russian and kucherov was Canadian the writers would have voted differently.

 

[landy]

Less points per game agains than kuch. Less points per game against top 10 teams. Plays and feeds on the bottom feeders last year more than kucherov like the sharks and coyotes. Still couldn't outperform kucherov. He wasnt goodenough to carry his team back to back cups. Makar is the mvp of avs this year not Mack. If Mack was Russian and kucherov was Canadian the writers would have voted differently.

Where do you find that stat organized?

In general, youre talking about the Art Ross. There is more to the Hart than points. And the national thing is just a dumb take. I can get behind Makar kindof like McDavid/Draisaitl, but then if so Id give the Hart to Eichel this year.

 

[bobbyking]

just a horrible take

 

[DrDangles]

MVP > Art Ross ( Even if it was a phony MVP that kuch deserved )

I had this same opinion towards the end of last season but also winning the Lindsay ends this debate IMO.

I guess it depends on how you want to interpret the meaning of the Hart, but I trust the opinion of the PA over the media.

 

[RussianBum86]

Where do you find that stat organized?

In general, youre talking about the Art Ross. There is more to the Hart than points. And the national thing is just a dumb take. I can get behind Makar kindof like McDavid/Draisaitl, but then if so Id give the Hart to Eichel this year.

I posted it multiple times last year. Kucherov had higher points per game, much higher gap to second player in points on his team, and was over .2 points per game higher against top 10 team. HE also played in a much tougher division and conference last year. He was robbed of the HART because he is Russian and a pointless all-star game that means nothing to anyone but fans paying to watch a scrimmage. Look at all the bottom feeders in the west and the cup came from the toughest division last season the Atlantic. You dont pick the mvl champion from the pro bowl.

 

[Ignatius]

Can WacDavid even ever be considered a top 5er since Nate and the Koocher are winning all these awards over him? I don't McDoovid will ever be better than Crosberries and the Jagrmeister

 

[landy]

I posted it multiple times last year. Kucherov had higher points per game, much higher gap to second player in points on his team, and was over .2 points per game higher against top 10 team. HE also played in a much tougher division and conference last year. He was robbed of the HART because he is Russian and a pointless all-star game that means nothing to anyone but fans paying to watch a scrimmage. Look at all the bottom feeders in the west and the cup came from the toughest division last season the Atlantic. You dont pick the mvl champion from the pro bowl.
View attachment 1006855
View attachment 1006856

Right but where does it say % of points that came against certain teams. I know we can do it manually, but assumed there was an easier way or you already calculated it.

Again, the Hart is about more than points and quality of teammates, or lack there of. Youre campaigning for the Art Ross, not the Hart in your posts. The Russian thing is just silly btw.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Less points per game agains than kuch. Less points per game against top 10 teams. Plays and feeds on the bottom feeders last year more than kucherov like the sharks and coyotes. Still couldn't outperform kucherov. He wasnt goodenough to carry his team back to back cups. Makar is the mvp of avs this year not Mack. If Mack was Russian and kucherov was Canadian the writers would have voted differently.

Carry? Do you mean for two months after months of LTIR rest where his team carried him to the playoffs?

 

[crowfish]

Youre still referencing guys with Cups. Look at Joe Thornton, Marcel Dionne, Jarome Iginla, Pavelski, Lunqvist, Bure, etc. Theyre all lower than they would be on our lists because of no Cups. McDavid right now is pacing to be the best of that group.

Why are you using the logic that since they have something in common (no Cup), that means they are in the same tier, and every other factor gets ignored? That is a painfully simple and ignorant way to analyze a career. I can do a simple test to prove you are wrong with 4 questions

Does anyone have Thornton, Dionne & others in the top 5 all-time? NO
Does anyone have McDavid in the top 5 all-time? YES (myself included)
Would anyone put Thornton, Dionne & others in the top 5 if they won a Cup? NO
Would anyone put McDavid in the top 5 if he won a Cup? YES (almost everyone)

Do you not see the difference between McDavid and those players? They have 1 similarity and several key differences. You seem stuck with the 1 similarity.

There is another way to visualize how absurd it is to mention McDavid with those names: Key trophies (Ross, Hart, Lindsay, Smythe)

McDavid
5x Ross
3x Hart
4x Lindsay
1x Smythe
= 13 points

Combined: Dionne, Thornton, Iginla, Pavelski, Bure
3x Ross
1x Hart
3x Lindsay
0x Smythe
= 7 points

To make it a fair fight, you would need to add several other HOF-worthy players to match the resume of one Connor McDavid. Let's add in both Sedins, Lindros, Sundin, Oates, Hawerchuk, Gartner

McDavid
5x Ross
3x Hart
4x Lindsay
1x Smythe
= 13 points

Combined: Dionne, Thornton, Iginla, Pavelski, Bure, Sedin (x2), Lindros, Sundin, Oates, Hawerchuk, Gartner
5x Ross
3x Hart
5x Lindsay
0x Smythe
= 13 points

If we use 12 HOFers, we can match the resume of Connor McDavid. He is in the same tier as them, but only if you combine all 12 of them into 1 super player

 

[landy]

Why are you using the logic that since they have something in common (no Cup), that means they are in the same tier, and every other factor gets ignored? That is a painfully simple and ignorant way to analyze a career. I can do a simple test to prove you are wrong with 4 questions

Does anyone have Thornton, Dionne & others in the top 5 all-time? NO
Does anyone have McDavid in the top 5 all-time? YES (myself included)
Would anyone put Thornton, Dionne & others in the top 5 if they won a Cup? NO
Would anyone put McDavid in the top 5 if he won a Cup? YES (almost everyone)

Do you not see the difference between McDavid and those players? They have 1 similarity and several key differences. You seem stuck with the 1 similarity.

There is another way to visualize how absurd it is to mention McDavid with those names: Key trophies (Ross, Hart, Lindsay, Smythe)

McDavid
5x Ross
3x Hart
4x Lindsay
1x Smythe
= 13 points

Combined: Dionne, Thornton, Iginla, Pavelski, Bure
3x Ross
1x Hart
3x Lindsay
0x Smythe
= 7 points

To make it a fair fight, you would need to add several other HOF-worthy players to match the resume of one Connor McDavid. Let's add in both Sedins, Lindros, Sundin, Oates, Hawerchuk, Gartner

McDavid
5x Ross
3x Hart
4x Lindsay
1x Smythe
= 13 points

Combined: Dionne, Thornton, Iginla, Pavelski, Bure, Sedin (x2), Lindros, Sundin, Oates, Hawerchuk, Gartner
5x Ross
3x Hart
5x Lindsay
0x Smythe
= 13 points

If we use 12 HOFers, we can match the resume of Connor McDavid. He is in the same tier as them, but only if you combine all 12 of them into 1 super player

Ok

 

[a mangy Meowth]

I posted it multiple times last year. Kucherov had higher points per game, much higher gap to second player in points on his team, and was over .2 points per game higher against top 10 team. HE also played in a much tougher division and conference last year. He was robbed of the HART because he is Russian and a pointless all-star game that means nothing to anyone but fans paying to watch a scrimmage. Look at all the bottom feeders in the west and the cup came from the toughest division last season the Atlantic. You dont pick the mvl champion from the pro bowl.

Buddy presented a picture of the standings as his main piece of evidence LOOOOOOL

 

[Hasbro]

Mackinnon won the Hart and the lindsay though. He also won a cup which those 2 guys didn't.

Yeah that’s the pivotal part of a legacy.

We saw how it dogged Bourque until he got over the top and McDavid is probably the best player in the history of the sport with the “No Ring” label.