Realistically, could Malkin have led a team to a Cup w/o Crosby?

[1OApick]

Add Malkin to any playoff team, they could be Top1-5 contenders. If you replace teams best center with Malkin it's not so evident. Maybe a team like Nashville could improve a lot. Changing RyJo to Malkin could make wonders to the team.

 

[Sam Spade]

A team? Sure, depending on the team. Those Cup winning Pens teams? No.

This is the answer for me. Crosby needed Malkin, Malkin needed Crosby, neither wins without the other.

If the team is made up correctly, like all teams, of course Malkin could do it.

 

[Leonhard Euler]

Seeing as he is pretty clear top 2 center of that generation, yes of course he could. In the end it's NHL and nothing is for sure, but if not top 3 player in the world then who?

 

[daver]

This is the answer for me. Crosby needed Malkin, Malkin needed Crosby, neither wins without the other.

If the team is made up correctly, like all teams, of course Malkin could do it.

The two best playoff performers of their era should have a great chance to be the winningest players of their era. It is arguably bad luck with injuries that kept them from winning more than three so far.

This sounds like an indirect way to excuse a certain player from winning more than one.

 

[Empoleon8771]

It depends on what this hypothetical is. Are we taking away Crosby and replacing him with an average 1C? Or just taking away Crosby? It's not really a question of "can Malkin lead the Penguins to a cup without Crosby", but rather "are the Penguins good enough to win a cup without Crosby"? There are just way too many hypotheticals for me to seriously answer this question.

A team could 100% win a cup with Malkin as their 1C, but that really says nothing.

 

[crazy8888]

Yes, with the right support Malkin could have won a cup without Crosby. Crosby could have won without Malkin if he had the right support.

However they would not win 3 cups without both being on same team

 

[Sam Spade]

The two best playoff performers of their era should have a great chance to be the winningest players of their era. It is arguably bad luck with injuries that kept them from winning more than three so far.

Did you know that outside of '14-'15 when Malkin didn't play and '10-'11 when neither played, they have in fact played every other playoff series together.

That's 10 of 12 playoff runs with both players. Three Cups is an incredible achievement but I could see how, with two of the three best players in the NHL on the same team, one might think that.

 

[daver]

Did you know that outside of '14-'15 when Malkin didn't play and '10-'11 when neither played, they have in fact played every other playoff series together.

That's 10 of 12 playoff runs with both players. Three Cups is an incredible achievement but I could see how, with two of the three best players in the NHL on the same team, one might think that.

Out od those 10 times, Malkin was injured a few times and Crosby wasn't 100% a few times..

 

[SensFactor]

Simple answer. No.

 

[Sam Spade]

Out od those 10 times, Malkin was injured a few times and Crosby wasn't 100% a few times..

 

[Fataldogg]

Yes, peak Malkin and peak Lundqvist = Cup.

Rangers played a tight 5-game series, all games decided by one goal if I remember correctly, against the Kings. I have a hard time believing with Malkin that they wouldn't have been the one's to win that series 4-1 instead.

 

[Plural]

Considering he'd be the best player on most cup winning teams ever, yes.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Let’s switch the first and second pick of the 2005 draft. Let’s say Anaheim has the first pick in 2005 instead of Pittsburgh, I’m definititely sure that Crosby would’ve led his team to a few Cup runs

And let’s say Washington drafts Malkin instead of Ovy in 04.
I’m pretty sure Washington wins a Cup and it ain’t taking 13 years, because Malkin is a better playoff performer than Ovy IMO.

Both Crosby & Malkin are game changers and both can carry a team on their back especially in their prime

So yes, no doubt in my mind

 

[Maestro84]

Considering Malkin would've been the number one centre on pretty much every other team but Pittsburgh this past decade (besides Edmonton in the McDavid era), I'd say yes for sure.

If you replaced Toews with Malkin as Chicago's #1 centre, they'd almost certainly win even more than 3 cups tbh.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

They're both two of the best playoff performers in history. Given the right team either could lead them to a cup.

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

Maybe, but i really think it's the Penguins 1 - 2 center punch that put them over the top. Having a deep roster is necessary, but having two solid franchise centers is a clutch.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Unlikely, but hard to project who replaces Crosby in that scenario.

 

[BillNy]

He led the Penguins to great records every time Sid was hurt. I am a big believer in elite, elite talent. I think you need one of the best few players in the game to enter the conversation. Not a single player on any Blackhawks Cup teams, not even Kane, peaked at "as good as the average Malkin season." You could make a serious argument that the only player to win a Cup during Malkin's career who was better than Malkin was at the time was Sid, and I'm not 100% positive Sid was better than Malkin, anyway. Malkin certainly had a better 2009 playoffs, and arguably in the latter two Cup runs, despite Sid winning the Conn Smythe. I'm admittedly hard on Sid, but that's not even a shot. If you said "Evgeni Malkin is the best hockey player of the last 15 years" - is that an unreasonable proposition? Malkin is just insanely good. Trade Malkin for the best player on any semi-serious contender the last 15 years, with the POSSIBLE exception of the Capitals, and the Red Wings Sharks teams before the decade changed, and they're heavy Cup favorites.

 

[BillNy]

Add Malkin to any playoff team, they could be Top1-5 contenders. If you replace teams best center with Malkin it's not so evident. Maybe a team like Nashville could improve a lot. Changing RyJo to Malkin could make wonders to the team.

Okay, realistically, how many playoff teams are not a top-5 Cup contender trading their 1C for Malkin? Just going by last year... Listen, I'm not sure who you'd have as a top-5 Cup contender last year, but to me, the closest centers to Malkin who made the playoffs were uhh, idk, Bergeron, Backstrom, Matthews, Stamkos, Couturier, Kopitar, MacKinnon? I am certainly higher than average on Bergeron, Backstrom, Matthews, Couturier, and Kopitar, probably about average on Kopitar, but the only scenarios on this list that I don't think trading them for Malkin makes them a top-5 team are MacKinnon and *MAYBE* Kopitar, and I'm very uncertain on Kopitar, and I think MacKinnon should've won the MVP if we're deciding McDavid can't win because he didn't make the playoffs (love Hall, it was hilarious that he won, MacKinnon is better), and I'm very low on last year's Avs roster beyond their best like, 4-5 players. Malkin is insanely good.

RyJo to Malkin... Eklund's wet dream (why does he love Nashville so much??) - Nashville probably stomps everyone on their way to a Cup. I took to Arvidsson before his breakout year and he was one of those guys I'm proud of noticing despite not being on my team. Imagine Malkin centering Arvidsson/Forsberg, and knowing they'd almost always be on the ice with two of Josi, Ekholm, Subban, and Ellis. Insane. Nashville is great to begin with.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

He led the Penguins to great records every time Sid was hurt. I am a big believer in elite, elite talent. I think you need one of the best few players in the game to enter the conversation. Not a single player on any Blackhawks Cup teams, not even Kane, peaked at "as good as the average Malkin season." You could make a serious argument that the only player to win a Cup during Malkin's career who was better than Malkin was at the time was Sid, and I'm not 100% positive Sid was better than Malkin, anyway. Malkin certainly had a better 2009 playoffs, and arguably in the latter two Cup runs, despite Sid winning the Conn Smythe. I'm admittedly hard on Sid, but that's not even a shot. If you said "Evgeni Malkin is the best hockey player of the last 15 years" - is that an unreasonable proposition? Malkin is just insanely good. Trade Malkin for the best player on any semi-serious contender the last 15 years, with the POSSIBLE exception of the Capitals, and the Red Wings Sharks teams before the decade changed, and they're heavy Cup favorites.

Kane's peak season rivals anything Malkin has done.

Yes it's unreasonable. He is a clear #3.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Kane's peak season rivals anything Malkin has done.

Yes it's unreasonable. He is a clear #3.

2009 and 2012 says otherwise.

 

[Icebreakers]

lol why is this a question? Hes a top 3 player of this generation.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

2009 and 2012 says otherwise.

Malkin 12 > Kane 16 > Malkin 09.

Malkin is obviously better than Kane, I'm not arguing that. That poster was saying that "Malkin's average > Kane's peak" which is just ridiculous.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Malkin 12 > Kane 16 > Malkin 09.

Malkin is obviously better than Kane, I'm not arguing that. That poster was saying that "Malkin's average > Kane's peak" which is just ridiculous.

I agree.

However if you include playoffs it’s:

Malkin 2009 > Malkin 2012 > Kane 2016

 

[BillNy]

Kane's peak season rivals anything Malkin has done.

Yes it's unreasonable. He is a clear #3.

Behind Sid and Ovechkin? that seems bonkers to me. He isn't clearly behind either. As for Kane? just for shorthand, Malkin's career pts/game is 1.19. Kane's top three seasons are 1.29 (his MVP year), and then 1.17 (the half-season), and 1.09. I'm really not sure Kane's peak is actually any better than average Malkin.