Sidney Crosby Top 5 player of all time
- Thread starter edog37
- Start date
- Status
Hatfield
Registered User
- Jan 27, 2007
- 1,101
- 1,092
Lol at running 100 years ago compaired to the new roid world.
Two tenths of a second seperate 80's ben johnson from todays record. Blink your eyes, thats how much faster a guy today ran 328 feet then a guy in the 80's. Meaning if you blinked you missed the winner. Your theory on super evolution is whacky
Crosby has a great argument to be a Top 5 player after his first 14 years and/or Top 5 player at age 31.
SeanConn
Registered User
Again... Brett Hull, Federov, Messier all won harts during the "great twos" prime... Had Hasek been given a chance to be a starter as early as Roy he very well may have won a prime during 1988-1994.
Roy's three Conn Smythes out of four cup wins is absolutely insane... but Hasek's back to back Hart/Pearsons are the difference maker in my opinion. Roy was never considered the best player in the NHL at any point in his career... he was "only" considered the best goalie, while Hasek was considered the best player in the league at one point... that's what makes him the greatest in my eyes, and many others. In terms of Roy vs Hasek ... the 1998 Olympics is the definitive contest between the two, and Hasek came out on too!
Tuna Tatarrrrrr
Here Is The Legendary Rat Of HFBoards! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Jun 13, 2012
- 1,978
- 1,987
Again, it was harder for goalies to win the Hart at this time especially with all the great forwards back then.
No, the difference maker for all-time great goalies are Stanley Cups like the Super Bowls are for all-time great QBs in the NFL. And Roy has won 3 more Cups than Hasek as a starter and the record for most Conn Smythe ever.
"He was only considered..." Nope, he is largely seen as the greatest goaltender of all time among fans and medias but keep trying. Roy is the greatest goaltender of all time, period!
Theres group of up to 10-12 guys who have an argument for 5th best player ever. Crosby is one of those
The fact that hes only 31 (vs full careers) doesnt give him the strongest argument but he is in there and with the rest of his career could still solidify his case some more.
The fact that hes only 31 (vs full careers) doesnt give him the strongest argument but he is in there and with the rest of his career could still solidify his case some more.
ElLeetch
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2018
- 3,188
- 3,881
Stamkos4life
Registered User
- Oct 25, 2018
- 2,955
- 2,630
SeanConn
Registered User
He was only considered the greatest goalie in the league... Hasek was considered the best player of ANY position in the entire league.
NFL football has nothing to do with this. Roy is the greatest playoff goalie of all time... but Hasek was no slouch in the playoffs either. Hasek's run in 1999 was Conn Smythe worthy, along with his 2002 cup win.
Hasek has an Olympic Gold, which Roy does not have... and why doesn't Roy have an Olympic gold? Oh right, because of Dominik Hasek carrying the entire Czech team to their epic gold medal victory in 1998.
Hasek is the only goalie in NHL history to have more than 1 Hart trophy, and more than 1 Pearson.
I don't have to keep trying to prove something that is a shared belief among many other people... that Hasek is the greatest goaltender in the history of hockey. Roy is a close #2... but Hasek is the G.O.A.T.
Crosby is not ahead of Hasek in an all time list, and he's probably not ahead of Roy either.
Tuna Tatarrrrrr
Here Is The Legendary Rat Of HFBoards! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Jun 13, 2012
- 1,978
- 1,987
LOL Olympic gold medal... Lemieux has an Olympic Gold and Gretzky not but the latter is still considered the greatest player ever. But yeah continue with this nonsense of Olympic medal.
Roy is the greatest goalie of all time and Hasek a close #2, that's it.
And yes, Crosby doesn't have surpassed them.
SeanConn
Registered User
Did I say Lemieux having a gold while Gretzky doesn't mean Lemieux is better? NOPE lol.
However, in the case of Roy and Hasek, it's the only time (to my knowledge) that the two goalies faced off against each other in an elimination setting... that 1998 Olympic hockey tournament was the biggest deal at the time... Gretzky wanted that gold medal so badly, and he was absolutely crushed he didn't win. Roy faced off against Hasek, and Hasek came out on top.
Hasek is the greatest goalie of all time and Roy a close #2, it's that simple.
Sempiternal
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2014
- 3,460
- 1,944
Tuna Tatarrrrrr
Here Is The Legendary Rat Of HFBoards! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- Jun 13, 2012
- 1,978
- 1,987
The Lemieux-Gretzky was only a reference to your gold medal argument. Roy isn't the greatest because he doesn't have a gold medal? Then Gretzky shouldn't be because Lemieux has one too...
Roy is the greatest goalie of all time and Hasek a close #2, this is that simple.
If he gets another Hart nomination this year, only the Big Four will have more Top 3 Art Ross finishes/Hart nominations in their careers.
SeanConn
Registered User
Lemieux and Gretzky would have been on the same team... Hasek literally shut down Canada and denied Roy his gold medal, that's what I'm saying regarding the gold medal. Hasek was the MVP of that tournament.
Roy has a longer NHL career with more wins, more cups... but Hasek in less time got double the Vezinas of Roy, won 2 league MVPs, and it's not like he never won a cup... Hasek is just greater.
WingsFan95
Registered User
It's funny to me that in hockey the goaltender is clearly the most valuable position yet all you see is forwards in all-time lists even if people don't separate skaters from goaltenders, many are just quick to jump on Howe/Lemieux/Gretzky and of course Orr on defense.
But defensemen as well can be argued more valuable than any forward if they're an all-timer like Bourque or Potvin.
So how do we do this exactly?
Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek are with little argument the two most valuable players in the Expansion Era. Although you could also argue Orr and Bourque but unfortunately we know they needed great teams to advance. Obviously Roy and Hasek didn't win single handedly but closer to than Orr/Bourque. Roy in 93 and Hasek in 99.
If we're sticking strictly to forwards, I'd like the Crosby fanatics to tell me how he's ahead of ALL the following guys:
Jaromir Jagr
Mark Messier
Mike Bossy
Alex Ovechkin
Phil Esposito
Bobby Hull
Brett Hull
That's 7 players. Obviously we're not even entertaining Howe/Lemieux/Gretzky and Rocket Richard we'll consider as pre-modern era.
But defensemen as well can be argued more valuable than any forward if they're an all-timer like Bourque or Potvin.
So how do we do this exactly?
Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek are with little argument the two most valuable players in the Expansion Era. Although you could also argue Orr and Bourque but unfortunately we know they needed great teams to advance. Obviously Roy and Hasek didn't win single handedly but closer to than Orr/Bourque. Roy in 93 and Hasek in 99.
If we're sticking strictly to forwards, I'd like the Crosby fanatics to tell me how he's ahead of ALL the following guys:
Jaromir Jagr
Mark Messier
Mike Bossy
Alex Ovechkin
Phil Esposito
Bobby Hull
Brett Hull
That's 7 players. Obviously we're not even entertaining Howe/Lemieux/Gretzky and Rocket Richard we'll consider as pre-modern era.
Nathaniel Skywalker
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2013
- 14,115
- 5,743
sabresEH
Registered User
It’s always hard for goalies to win the Hart or Pearson/Lindsay no matter the era.
I like to keep goalies and players separate. But if including both I would agree. Crosby has surpassed both.
I will preface this by saying I enjoy this debate and the only goalie I accept as answer besides Hasek to the GOAT is Roy. But quite honestly, it’s Hasek and it’s kind of not close.
I know nothing I say will change your mind. I just will add a few notes I’ve come up with over the years.
1) both these guys are born in ‘65 however Hasek was an early birthday and Roy a late one. Point is they are great comparables as they are within one year of each other age wise.
2) Roy never won a Vezina after Hasek became a full time starter.
3) I remember actually looking it up a few years ago. But they faced each other 3 times in elimination games. (‘98 semis, ‘02 WCF, and I forget the other). Hasek was on the winning end each time. If one of the main arguments in favour of Roy for the Roy vs Hasek debate is 3CS or “clutchness” then this helps negate that to an extent.
4) In regards to the 3CS vs 0 argument and 4Cups vs 1Cup. The Conn Smythe is a highly regarded award as it should be. But it’s also a by product of a team award(95% of the time the winner of the CS is on the cup winning team). Not diminishing Roy’s accomplishments in any way, just saying in that argument it’s tough to compare the two as one got to play on teams with multiple hall of famers where as Hasek played his best years in Buffalo with Miro Satan and Mike Peca as the best players. When he did play on a team that could rival Roy’s he not only won a cup, but he shut out Roy’s team in back to back games to get them to that cup final. While me may not have won a smythe he’s clearly no slouch in important games.
5) Seasons with a sv% over .930. Hasek - 5 Roy - 0. This can be a by product of how teams play so it shouldn’t hold as much merit. But when Colorado has a defence consisting of several hall of famers and Buffalo had well.. Alexei Zhitnik, Jason Wooley, Richard Smehlik. Yes they kept the guys to the perimeter as best they could but putting up a sv% that high with a roster that shitty is quite the feat. I’m not sure if Roy would replicate those seasons if the roles were reversed.
6) Ken Dryden mentioned in his book. What’s the goalies job? To keep the puck out of the net. Who’s the best at keeping the puck out of the net?...
That’s all I have for now. But as I said I don’t expect to change your mind. I enjoy the debate and would love to hear your thoughts a little more.
Last edited:
Why isn't is Jean Beliveau mentioned? He, along with Hull are usually rated as the #5 player all-time.
And how is Hull not pre-modern era?
You obviously have arguments for all these players over Crosby, what are they?
Cyborg Yzerberg
Registered User
1. Gretzky
2. Orr
3. Howe
4. Lemieux
5. Beliveau
6. Hasek
7. Bourque
8. Harvey
9. Roy
10. Richard
11. Hull
12. Crosby
So no. He's not the 5th best player of all time. He's top 20 for sure though.
2. Orr
3. Howe
4. Lemieux
5. Beliveau
6. Hasek
7. Bourque
8. Harvey
9. Roy
10. Richard
11. Hull
12. Crosby
So no. He's not the 5th best player of all time. He's top 20 for sure though.
WingsFan95
Registered User
Bobby Hull played 5 seasons after expansion plus the WHA. And he was still prolific so a good indicator of modern era standards. Beliveau played just 4 seasons after and past his prime years although numbers were still good. I think his lack of individual hardware is something, 6 first teams of course is big but a loaded team. Same reason why the Rocket is huge but you wonder if he played on the Rangers if he has same numbers.
My arguments for both Hulls, Esposito, Messier and Jagr is their longevity and prolific scoring as well as leadership in the case of Messier's 6 Cups.
Ovechkin I think with a record 8 goal scoring leads is individual more prolific than Crosby ever was. You simply can't ignore the arguably greatest goal scorer of all time and he has a Cup now while his playoff averages are pretty high despite only once making it past the 2nd round. I also don't put much weight on Crosby's 2nd Conn Smythe which seems to be a big notch for his fans.
That leaves Bossy. To me you can go either way. Bossy was a substantially better goal scorer and his career accomplishments are damn high when you consider not just Cups but 5 First Teams and 3 Second Teams in a 10 year career. Crosby with all the injury talk has now logged 14 seasons. He has 4 First Teams and 2 Second Teams. So for concentration, Bossy is better but Crosby now has longevity against him and 3 Cups in this era are at least equal to 4 in that era. I personally take Bossy because of his domination and although his career was cut short he had as many full seasons.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Grand Final Brisbane Lions vs Sydney Swans - MCG, MelbourneWagers: 10Staked: $10,821.00Event closes- Updated: