Sidney Crosby - best player ever?

[Despote]

Some people are wondering:

Let’s say it’s Sept 1992 and you get to choose any player from history- as they are. You can reach into the future to present day.

Who do you take first overall?

Gavin McKenna

 

[tinyzombies]

Is he better at impacting five on five or even strength goal differential than a guy like Bobby Clarke, though, if that's all one really wants to concern themselves with?

How about Gretzky? Plus/minus isn't the greatest stat, but his plus/minus numbers in certain prime seasons stand out to the extent that you can reasonably infer his overall net impact at even strength was very strong. In fact, I'm not sure Crosby comes much closer to it than he does to his scoring. Yes, he had guys like Kurri to insulate him defensively and his team let him play to his strengths, but is a guy like Kurri so hard to find that it would be impossible to re-create a similar ideal situation for a guy like Wayne? Look at what Hyman is doing in EDM.

80’s dude. How many does he score today? How many does Sid score in 1982? If a 1982 fan saw hockey in 2024 their eyes would pop out of their head at the skill and goaltending. Asking for a friend.

 

[tinyzombies]

Gavin McKenna

From the Love Boat?

Probably one of Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, or Hasek.

I think a fan back then would look at the giant leap in league wide skill and goaltending and weigh the decision a lot more heavily. I mean some people are thinking that.

 

[Crosby2010]

I think people hit the nail on the head here. Crosby just hasn't been able to penetrate the big 4. Hey, who can? But he is potentially the next best guy at #5.

It started out where we weren't sure in the beginning of his career. He had a 102 and 120 point season. Gretzky had 137 and 164. Adjust for the scoring and you still give Gretzky the edge. And then his 3rd season he broke every record in the book and just skyrocketed from there. So Crosby wasn't ever going to be another Gretzky. However, the first two years he was similar to Mario's first two. Mario had a 100 and 141 point year. That's similar to Crosby. Mario's 3rd year was good too, but Crosby made the Cup final his 3rd year. It was Mario's 4th year of 168 points where he hit a different stride and Crosby just never caught up. By season 5 Mario had 199 points and he was in another galaxy as Crosby who had 109 points in his 5th year. So we realized that Crosby just wasn't going to hit Mario's impact overall either.

Hey, nothing wrong with this. Who the heck can? Crosby did have those moments like in 2011 where it looked like he was going to lap the field and in 2013 too where he almost led the NHL in points despite missing 25% of the season. Similar to Jagr in 2000 for example. But to have him parallel with Mario or Gretzky just wasn't realistic anymore. Ditto for Orr. Orr had years that were bigger than Crosby's. The funny thing is Howe is probably the one Crosby is closest to in career value. Both of them play(ed) forever and are still good in their old age. Howe probably brought a bit more to the table overall with his physicality, but Crosby has done things that Howe has done as well when it comes to longevity. The only issue I think is that Howe at his best tops Crosby at his best. So yeah, I can't put him in the top 4 if I am being honest and I love the guy.

You can say with a straight face he is #5 though. Beliveau, Hull, Richard and Jagr are the forwards that all could make a case for it. Harvey and Bourque perhaps as defensemen. But you know, I think Crosby wins here. If you want to put any of the other forwards ahead of him that isn't a crime either, I get it, but he's had 8 times as either a 1st or 2nd all-star at centre, and I think he had a deeper elite crop in his era than Beliveau. Was he better than Beliveau? Different styles for sure and I think you can't go wrong building your team around either one of them, but he certainly merits being #5 all-time.

McDavid could very well be the #5 here someday. But let's not act as if 19 years of Crosby is worse than 9 years of McDavid. McDavid has been better than Crosby at his best, I think, but Sid had a better all around game and he took his teams a lot further and did it often. Few players have Crosby's playoff resume. So give McDavid time but he's not there yet.

 

[Crosby2010]

80’s dude. How many does he score today? How many does Sid score in 1982? If a 1982 fan saw hockey in 2024 their eyes would pop out of their head at the skill and goaltending. Asking for a friend.

I can't speak for him but my best answer is always this. If Crosby is back in 1982 then he notices a lot of changes as well. The equipment is not at 2024's standards, the sticks are heavier, his skates aren't as good and he's in an NHL that still has plenty of helmetless players (although it was dwindling by then). With the way Crosby's style would be he would have guys coming after him and gooning it up a bit more against him. So you have to take the good with the bad. Crosby has the same advantages or disadvantages as the players did in 1982 just like Gretzky coming to 2024 has all the modern day advantages as well. There are times I watch the modern game and I salivate at how good Gretzky could be, or especially Mario without the clutching and grabbing. We'll just never know, which is why we judge them against their peers.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Jagr, Hasek, Bourque, Shore, McDavid, Roy, Beliveau, Morenz, Lidstrom, Plante (edit - Hull, Richard and Ovechkin have to be in the conversation too)

I think an argument can be made for most of those players, individually, to be ranked higher than Crosby.

But I don't see any internally consistent list that would have 6+ of those players ahead of him (which would be necessary to keep Crosby out of the top ten).

For example, maybe you rank McDavid > Crosby due to regular season offensive peak. That's fine. But if someone ranked McDavid ahead, they're clearly not placing much emphasis on playoff success or longevity. In which case, I don't see how you could rank Beliveau, Lidstrom, or Roy ahead.

Or you can rank Richard ahead because you really value playoff success and length of prime. That's fine, but then there doesn't seem to be much of a case for Morenz, Ovechkin, Hasek or even Hull.

The point is - there's probably around 15 players who we can argue as being better/greater than Crosby. But I can't think of any internally consistent list that would have all, or even most of them, ahead. Crosby (like Beliveau) has such a well-balanced resume, with no major weaknesses, that there aren't a lot of players that should be ranked ahead.

 

[tinyzombies]

I think people hit the nail on the head here. Crosby just hasn't been able to penetrate the big 4. Hey, who can? But he is potentially the next best guy at #5.

It started out where we weren't sure in the beginning of his career. He had a 102 and 120 point season. Gretzky had 137 and 164. Adjust for the scoring and you still give Gretzky the edge. And then his 3rd season he broke every record in the book and just skyrocketed from there. So Crosby wasn't ever going to be another Gretzky. However, the first two years he was similar to Mario's first two. Mario had a 100 and 141 point year. That's similar to Crosby. Mario's 3rd year was good too, but Crosby made the Cup final his 3rd year. It was Mario's 4th year of 168 points where he hit a different stride and Crosby just never caught up. By season 5 Mario had 199 points and he was in another galaxy as Crosby who had 109 points in his 5th year. So we realized that Crosby just wasn't going to hit Mario's impact overall either.

Hey, nothing wrong with this. Who the heck can? Crosby did have those moments like in 2011 where it looked like he was going to lap the field and in 2013 too where he almost led the NHL in points despite missing 25% of the season. Similar to Jagr in 2000 for example. But to have him parallel with Mario or Gretzky just wasn't realistic anymore. Ditto for Orr. Orr had years that were bigger than Crosby's. The funny thing is Howe is probably the one Crosby is closest to in career value. Both of them play(ed) forever and are still good in their old age. Howe probably brought a bit more to the table overall with his physicality, but Crosby has done things that Howe has done as well when it comes to longevity. The only issue I think is that Howe at his best tops Crosby at his best. So yeah, I can't put him in the top 4 if I am being honest and I love the guy.

You can say with a straight face he is #5 though. Beliveau, Hull, Richard and Jagr are the forwards that all could make a case for it. Harvey and Bourque perhaps as defensemen. But you know, I think Crosby wins here. If you want to put any of the other forwards ahead of him that isn't a crime either, I get it, but he's had 8 times as either a 1st or 2nd all-star at centre, and I think he had a deeper elite crop in his era than Beliveau. Was he better than Beliveau? Different styles for sure and I think you can't go wrong building your team around either one of them, but he certainly merits being #5 all-time.

McDavid could very well be the #5 here someday. But let's not act as if 19 years of Crosby is worse than 9 years of McDavid. McDavid has been better than Crosby at his best, I think, but Sid had a better all around game and he took his teams a lot further and did it often. Few players have Crosby's playoff resume. So give McDavid time but he's not there yet.

Again you are comparing four vastly different leagues, quality of goalies, etc. said a friend of mine. She says adjusted numbers should take into account the quality of goaltending not just a comparison between peer skaters or era to era.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Again you are comparing four vastly different leagues, quality of goalies, etc. said a friend of mine

This isn't some novel concept that we haven't thought of...we know that there's different qualities of the league that ebb and flow.

I'm watching video of New Hampshire prep school hockey right now...I don't treat that as if I'm watching a USHL or NCAA game...I have to adjust for that.

 

[tinyzombies]

This isn't some novel concept that we haven't thought of...we know that there's different qualities of the league that ebb and flow.

I'm watching video of New Hampshire prep school hockey right now...I don't treat that as if I'm watching a USHL or NCAA game...I have to adjust for that.

I don’t see a quality of goaltending adjustment, for starters. Gretz isn’t scoring 92 today.

 

[WarriorofTime]

"my friend" says, just say what you think lol

 

[jigglysquishy]

Nobody is arguing that Gretzky would score 92 today.

But he did lead the league in points 11 times. Playoffs in points 6 times. Senior men's international hockey 4 times. 21 times.

Crosby lead the league in points twice. Playoffs once. Senior men's once.

Even if you look at only Canadians, the gulf is massive.

 

[tinyzombies]

Nobody is arguing that Gretzky would score 92 today.

But he did lead the league in points 11 times. Playoffs in points 6 times. Senior men's international hockey 4 times. 21 times.

Crosby lead the league in points twice. Playoffs once. Senior men's once.

Even if you look at only Canadians, the gulf is massive.

The disparity in Crosby’s league isn’t just between peer skaters, it’s against the obstacles and his obstacles (goalies, better team depth and systems, far more advanced fitness levels, equipment and skills) were far more pronounced, you can compare the gala apple to a red apple, saying the first is sweeter but if you try to make apple juice with a spoon vs a juicer, my friend says you are making a flawed argument.

 

[Henry Miller]

Well it seems Crosby’s reign won’t last long as the best player in a decade or two will be better than Crosby. Players getting better and all

 

[tinyzombies]

Well it seems Crosby’s reign won’t last long as the best player in a decade or two will be better than Crosby. Players getting better and all

That’s possible. I don’t see that anyone has caught him yet, my friend Confucius says.

The main factors between generations that need to be accounted for when adjusting that aren’t now done: disparity in goaltending (not just raw numbers- you can see with your eyes the mammoth difference; the sticks; and the systems).

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don’t see a quality of goaltending adjustment, for starters. Gretz isn’t scoring 92 today.

Ok, Gretz doesn't have to score 92 today to be considered great either.

But, he also gets new equipment and new techniques and a new development route...ya know, for starters...

 

[tinyzombies]

Ok, Gretz doesn't have to score 92 today to be considered great either.

But, he also gets new equipment and new techniques and a new development route...ya know, for starters...

Agreed. But I don’t see him outscoring Crosby in this era. I don’t see it. Definitely not in goals, and Crosby can create and carry when things are chaotic at a modern pace.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Agreed. But I don’t see him outscoring Crosby in this era. I don’t see it. Definitely not in goals, and Crosby can create and carry when things are chaotic at a modern pace.

I don't see Crosby outscoring Gretzky in this era.

See, it goes both ways.

You've been here 22 years. You're better than this.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Agreed. But I don’t see him outscoring Crosby in this era. I don’t see it. Definitely not in goals, and Crosby can create and carry when things are chaotic at a modern pace.

LOL

That is all.

 

[Henry Miller]

At this point it’s our fault for feeding the troll

 

[tinyzombies]

I don't see Crosby outscoring Gretzky in this era.

See, it goes both ways.

You've been here 22 years. You're better than this.

let’s say goaltending today is the best it’s ever been - everyone can shoot and pass and skating and skill never better. Profly technique a massive leap from before. What is that worth as a difference? You can’t put let’s say Don Edwards in nets now, you’d do better with a junior goalie playing profly. So is Edward’s the equivalent of today’s junior goalie?

Does that make today’s average goalie maybe 60% better? Then remove maybe 40% for the sticks?

So you have to adjust numbers and THEN take another 20% off from Gretzky’s numbers? And Gretz wasn’t a shooter per se anyway, so maybe 25%?

(PS my friend has commandeered my typewriter.)

 

[DitchMarner]

80’s dude. How many does he score today? How many does Sid score in 1982? If a 1982 fan saw hockey in 2024 their eyes would pop out of their head at the skill and goaltending. Asking for a friend.

Yeah, I get that angle. That's not usually how people evaluate players or careers, though.

So what are we supposed to do... make special accommodations so Crosby (or whoever) can be ranked first but rank all other players the way we always do?

Seems unfair to other players, to be honest.

Or do we just throw out everything before 1990 or 2000?

What if someone thinks Crosby peaked in 2011 and that he wouldn't have been able to do in 2023 what McDavid did that season or what MacKinnon or Kucherov did this season? If the evolution of hockey is a thing, then it shouldn't stop in the 2000s or 2010s. What if someone wants to say these guys are better in an absolute sense and wants to rank them higher? What's to stop them? Are things like career longevity, career accomplishments and Championships back on the table?

To put Crosby ahead of Gretzky and Lemieux, you may as well just devise a whole new means of ranking players all-time. Take the top ten or so from one generation and rank them one to ten and then the top ten from the previous generation and put them 11 to 20 and so on. Or maybe make judgement adjustments... I don't know. Maybe some would be down with the idea. It doesn't really appeal to me.

 

[tinyzombies]

Yeah, I get that angle. That's not usually how people evaluate players or careers, though.

So what are we supposed to do... make special accommodations so Crosby (or whoever) can be ranked first but rank all other players the way we always do?

Seems unfair to other players, to be honest.

Or do we just throw out everything before 1990 or 2000?

What if someone thinks Crosby peaked in 2011 and that he wouldn't have been able to do in 2023 what McDavid did that season or what MacKinnon or Kucherov did this season? If the evolution of hockey is a thing, then it shouldn't stop in the 2000s or 2010s. What if someone wants to say these guys are better in an absolute sense and wants to rank them higher? What's to stop them? Are things like career longevity, career accomplishments and Championships back on the table?

To put Crosby ahead of Gretzky and Lemieux, you may as well just devise a whole new means of ranking players all-time. Take the top ten or so from one generation and rank them one to ten and then the top ten from the previous generation and put them 11 to 20 and so on. Or maybe make judgement adjustments... I don't know. Maybe some would be down with the idea. It doesn't really appeal to me.

I think another stat adjustment taking into account goalies and sticks and maybe systems is in order. I understand the top down quantitative approach, but I don’t buy it as the only way to see all-time comparisons. The fact the goalies have kept the numbers so great is amazing and gives them an even further boost.

 

[Professor What]

Why is this thread four pages long now?

 

[DitchMarner]

Agreed. But I don’t see him outscoring Crosby in this era. I don’t see it. Definitely not in goals, and Crosby can create and carry when things are chaotic at a modern pace.

And Crosby can't outscore MacKinnon in this decade. Where are we going with this exactly?

Nate is a pretty great playoff performer as well. If he has another great playoff run and wins another Cup, what's keeping Crosby above him if we want to focus so much on modern scoring and ability?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The 80s were a joke - that’s the argument. Not mine but that’s the argument.

Ignore raw stats then.

Gretzky won 8 consecutive Harts and 8 consecutive Ross trophies. And in a 12 year span that grows to 9 Harts and 10 Ross.

Half of them coming against prime Lemieux so spare me the "better talent today" argument