Some summertime fun: Comparing Crosby vs. McDavid best Playoff runs

[blogofmike]

Not sure why you aren't acknowledging that McDavid had as much support, if not more support, than Crosby did in 2009 leading up to the SCF.

Because he didn't. Not even if you cherrypick the first three rounds (and the only apparent reason for doing so is to pump up Crosby.)

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Points[/TD]
[TD]Team GF[/TD]
[TD]Share of TmGF[/TD]
[TD]Lead over 2nd place[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]McDavid 2024[/TD]

[TD]

31​

[/TD]

[TD]

63​

[/TD]

[TD]

49%​

[/TD]

[TD]

11%​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Crosby 2009[/TD]

[TD]

28​

[/TD]

[TD]

65​

[/TD]

[TD]

43%​

[/TD]

[TD]

0%​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Even through 3 rounds, McDavid scored a higher percentage of team offense, McDavid outscored his next best teammate, and Fleury was better than Skinner.

Changed #7 in the OP to:

7. Crosby's 2018 run and 2010 run is more impressive than McDavid's 2023 run

Crosby's 2010 run gets especially underrated due to the Pens being viewed as blowing a chance to beat an easier on-paper opponent and for Crosby to win 3 straight Cups.

3 straight? Now you're giving Crosby an extra Stanley Cup?!?

Once that narrative is pushed aside, a challenge for some, it was his best 2 round performance once all the arguments for McDavid are applied:

- He faced great goaltending
- his performance is not reflected in points, great underlying stats
- lack of team support, notably from Malkin
- bad goaltending for his team

He obliterated the Sens with 14 points in 5 games (the best series stat-wise between the two) and then played great against the Habs.

The 2023 Oilers faced stronger opponents, and based on regular season records it's not even close. (Also the 22 Knights, you know, went on to win the Stanley Cup....)

Adin Hill's .932 save percentage was #1 in the 2023 NHL playoffs, and better than Halak, who posted an .884 against the Flyers one round later. The Sens were not a good defensive team. Again, look at the table in Post 26. The Sens were 18th in GA. McDavid's never faced a team that ranked that low.

In 2010 Crosby lacked team support so much that Alex Goligoski outscored him against Montreal.

In the series when they were eliminated, here are their main goaltenders, ranked by save percentage:
2018 Murray .905
2010 Fleury .892
2023 Skinner .875


Also, hate to burst your bubble, but McDavid's done better than 2010 Crosby did against the Sens, and he did so against better teams.

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]Opponent[/TD]
[TD]Opp GA Rk[/TD]
[TD]Points[/TD]
[TD]PPG[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Crosby 10[/TD]
[TD]Sens[/TD]
[TD]18th[/TD]

[TD]

14​

[/TD]

[TD]

2.33​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]McDavid 22[/TD]
[TD]Flames[/TD]
[TD]3rd[/TD]

[TD]

12​

[/TD]

[TD]

2.40​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]McDavid 24[/TD]
[TD]Kings[/TD]
[TD]3rd[/TD]

[TD]

12​

[/TD]

[TD]

2.40​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[Gorskyontario]

@daver has now somehow surpassed peak Crosby copium.


McDavid is a better player and a true generational talent. People need to come to terms with that. Crosby is a great player and has had a great career, but he also lost scoring titles to.... Henrik Sedin, and 87 point Jamie Benn.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Except against the Canucks this year. McDavid did not show up in Game 7, and was their 3rd best player for that series.

Not sure why you aren't acknowledging that McDavid had as much support, if not more support, than Crosby did in 2009 leading up to the SCF.

Oh I'm not denying McDavid got lots of help in the first 3 (really, 2.5) rounds.

It's the SCF where Malkin stepped up and Draisaitl disappeared.

2024 McDavid - 7 GP 3 G 8 A 11 P +5
2009 Malkin - 7 GP 2 G 6 A 8 P +-0

2009 Crosby - 7 GP 1 G 2 A 3 P -3
2024 Draisaitl - 7 GP 0 G 3 A 3 P -2

The 2009/2024 SCF divide when it comes to the performance of the four players in pretty clear. McDavid and Malkin played tremendous hockey. Crosby and Draisaitl did not.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Except against the Canucks this year. McDavid did not show up in Game 7, and was their 3rd best player for that series.

Not sure why you aren't acknowledging that McDavid had as much support, if not more support, than Crosby did in 2009 leading up to the SCF.

So you can argue that even when Crosby isn’t scoring or “showing up”, that he still plays well regardless….but when McDavid doesn’t score….why can’t he get the same benefit of the doubt?

What stats are better for McDavid in 2024 through 3 rounds than Crosby's stats through 3 rounds other than a 4% difference in PPG?

The eye test sees the Pens sweep in the 3rd round in 2009 while Crosby has 7 points and while the Oilers got swept in the 3rd round and McDavid has 7 points. At what point do points become less valuable?

Apparently Crosby's points in 2018 are less valuable.

The eye test…..oh Daver…

You are really going to ignore the obvious differences in the teams they played against? You really think Carolina was any bit close to the Avs that year? Also, why ignore who lead them against the Canes? Malkin had 6 goals and 9 points that series. Crosby was second to his own teammate, yet that isn’t being used against him?…

Again, Crosby was second to his own linemate that year. For someone who loves “context”, you certainly leave a lot out of it in regards to Crosby.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Oh I'm not denying McDavid got lots of help in the first 3 (really, 2.5) rounds.

It's the SCF where Malkin stepped up and Draisaitl disappeared.

2024 McDavid - 7 GP 3 G 8 A 11 P +5
2009 Malkin - 7 GP 2 G 6 A 8 P +-0

2009 Crosby - 7 GP 1 G 2 A 3 P -3
2024 Draisaitl - 7 GP 0 G 3 A 3 P -2

The 2009/2024 SCF divide when it comes to the performance of the four players in pretty clear. McDavid and Malkin played tremendous hockey. Crosby and Draisaitl did not.

Imagine if Draisaitl actually performed well in the finals. It definitely would have made a difference. I can’t help to think though, McDavid already gets so much grief for not “leading” his team in the finals, scoring in “meaningless games” and not showing up when it “mattered”….if Draisaitl would have scored a hat trick in game 7 and they won 3-2, I doubt Daver and company would give McDavid the credit or glory, but instead insist that he couldn’t “do it himself” and had to be “carried” by Draisaitl…

Basically, there’s always going to be something or some argument that needs to be made as to why McDavid isn’t good enough or doesn’t deserve to wear the crown.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Oh I'm not denying McDavid got lots of help in the first 3 (really, 2.5) rounds.

It's the SCF where Malkin stepped up and Draisaitl disappeared.

2024 McDavid - 7 GP 3 G 8 A 11 P +5
2009 Malkin - 7 GP 2 G 6 A 8 P +-0

2009 Crosby - 7 GP 1 G 2 A 3 P -3
2024 Draisaitl - 7 GP 0 G 3 A 3 P -2

The 2009/2024 SCF divide when it comes to the performance of the four players in pretty clear. McDavid and Malkin played tremendous hockey. Crosby and Draisaitl did not.

I may be wrong since I’m no math whiz. But pretty sure McDavids 11 points in the finals accounted for almost 48% of the teams offense that series. In 2009, crosbys 3 points accounted for 21% of the teams total offense.

Malkins 8 points was 57% of his teams offense. Draisaitl was 13% of his teams offense…

It’s pretty obvious that if Draisaitl doesn’t suddenly fall off a cliff, that the series could have been different if McDavid had more consistent secondary scoring like Crosby got.

 

[Cruor]

To understand Daver you have to appreciate the fact that he has spent thousands (and I mean thousands) of posts arguing Crosby over Jagr, that McDavid came along as soon as he did threw a big monkey wrench into his grand plan of having Crosby being a constituent of the big five.

He quite literally worked years for this (including the ludicrous "grace period" invention).

 

[Felidae]

@daver has now somehow surpassed peak Crosby copium.


McDavid is a better player and a true generational talent. People need to come to terms with that. Crosby is a great player and has had a great career, but he also lost scoring titles to.... Henrik Sedin, and 87 point Jamie Benn.

I'll give you Benn, since even going by adjusted stats it's one of the weakest art Ross wins. I don't know why Henrik Sedin's season is always lumped in with weak Art Ross wins though.

He had the highest EVP in a season this century and it took scoring going up by quite a bit for it to be surpassed.

Sedin's overall career is on the weaker side for Art Ross winners, but the season he actually won was a strong one

 

[Gorskyontario]

I'll give you Benn, since even going by adjusted stats it's one of the weakest art Ross wins. I don't know why Henrik Sedin's season is always lumped in with weak Art Ross wins though.

He had the highest EVP in a season this century and it took scoring going up by quite a bit for it to be surpassed.

Sedin's overall career is on the weaker side for Art Ross winners, but the season he actually won was a strong one

Crosby was healthy that year, unlike the two years that followed. Crosby was/is significantly better than either Sedin and should not have lost an Art Ross to them.

It's hard to imagine Gretzky losing a scoring title to Kent Nilsson, because he didn't.

 

[Felidae]

Crosby was healthy that year, unlike the two years that followed. Crosby was/is significantly better than either Sedin and should not have lost an Art Ross to them.

It's hard to imagine Gretzky losing a scoring title to Kent Nilsson, because he didn't.

Good thing no one here thinks McDavid or crosby is Gretzky level then.

My only point was that Henrik Sedin's Art Ross was not weak. It was more productive than McDavid's first 2 Art Ross seasons, and he did it in a lower scoring season.

Crosby in 2009-10 was also just a year older than McDavid's 2nd art Ross win, it's not hard to imagine 22 year old Crosby wasn't at his peak yet, just like how McDavid's first 2 Art Ross wins are not necessarily his stronger seasons.

 

[Vilica]

I was reading through the revision on #7, Crosby's 2018 more impressive than McDavid's 2023, and hoo boy is that a big one. Crosby's 2018 playoff run is easily defined by 3 percentages - 31%, 21.1%, and 19.5%. He shot 31% on 29 shots, a ridiculous outlier that is double any of his career averages, while he was on-ice at even strength, his line shot 21.1%, a number way out of line of his career (which is 10.7% in the regular season), and on the power play his line shot 19.5%. Nobody has a higher shooting percentage at even strength compared to the power play, unless you're looking at a 12 game sample. That 21.1% shooting percentage means since 23 goals were scored at even-strength that year, there were 109 shots taken while Crosby was on-ice.

If you look at Crosby's next 3 playoff runs, where he put up 5 even strength points in 14 games, on-ice his line went 2/40, 3/35 and 3/72, for a collective 8/147. Regression to the mean [23+8/109+147=31/256, or 12.1%]! I get there are a lot of confounding factors over 4 separate playoff runs, but the numbers are the numbers. Crosby's not going to randomly double his career shooting percentage over a sustained sample. It was 12 games, everything went in for he and his line, and then he got eliminated and the sample ended.

There is an obvious comparison to Ovechkin's 08-09 playoff run of 11+10=21, 90 shots in 14 games, but the simple conclusion is that those 3 highlighted numbers - player shooting percentage, even strength and power play on-ice shooting percentages - are well within Ovechkin's career norms. Ovechkin's playoff shooting percentage was 12.2%, his regular season shooting percentage to that point was 12.2%; his on-ice shooting percentage at even strength was 12.4%, which is higher than his career regular season of 10.5%, but in line with some of his best years; and his on-ice shooting percentage on the power play was 14.5%, right in line with his career 14.8%.

I bring that up not to try and compare an Ovechkin playoff run, but to show how an outlier run can either be supported or unsupported by the underlying numbers. We can acknowledge that Crosby's 2018 run was a good playoffs, but also admit that it was more down to luck in a small sample than any other reason. If we think about their even-strength on-ice percentages compared to their career numbers, Crosby's 21.1%, 23/109 is compared to 10.7%, his normal number would be 12, so he was on-ice for 11 extra goals in that 109 shot sample. Ovechkin's 12.4%, 17/137 is compared to 10.5%, his normal number would be 15, so he was on-ice for 2 extra goals in that 137 shot sample.

Returning to McDavid in 2023, he was unlucky at even-strength (his on-ice shooting percentage was 8.7 on a career of 11.2), but the Oilers went 18/39 on the power play in 12 games, and that shooting luck led to 12 of McDavid's 20 points. Their shooting percentage regressed to the mean the next year, which meant that they just went 22 for 75, a 29.3% clip instead of the 46.2% they had in 2023, but McDavid's even strength on-ice shooting percentage was 12.9%, so he went from 7 even strength points in 12 games to 25 even strength points in 25 games.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I was reading through the revision on #7, Crosby's 2018 more impressive than McDavid's 2023, and hoo boy is that a big one. Crosby's 2018 playoff run is easily defined by 3 percentages - 31%, 21.1%, and 19.5%. He shot 31% on 29 shots, a ridiculous outlier that is double any of his career averages, while he was on-ice at even strength, his line shot 21.1%, a number way out of line of his career (which is 10.7% in the regular season), and on the power play his line shot 19.5%. Nobody has a higher shooting percentage at even strength compared to the power play, unless you're looking at a 12 game sample. That 21.1% shooting percentage means since 23 goals were scored at even-strength that year, there were 109 shots taken while Crosby was on-ice.

If you look at Crosby's next 3 playoff runs, where he put up 5 even strength points in 14 games, on-ice his line went 2/40, 3/35 and 3/72, for a collective 8/147. Regression to the mean [23+8/109+147=31/256, or 12.1%]! I get there are a lot of confounding factors over 4 separate playoff runs, but the numbers are the numbers. Crosby's not going to randomly double his career shooting percentage over a sustained sample. It was 12 games, everything went in for he and his line, and then he got eliminated and the sample ended.

There is an obvious comparison to Ovechkin's 08-09 playoff run of 11+10=21, 90 shots in 14 games, but the simple conclusion is that those 3 highlighted numbers - player shooting percentage, even strength and power play on-ice shooting percentages - are well within Ovechkin's career norms. Ovechkin's playoff shooting percentage was 12.2%, his regular season shooting percentage to that point was 12.2%; his on-ice shooting percentage at even strength was 12.4%, which is higher than his career regular season of 10.5%, but in line with some of his best years; and his on-ice shooting percentage on the power play was 14.5%, right in line with his career 14.8%.

I bring that up not to try and compare an Ovechkin playoff run, but to show how an outlier run can either be supported or unsupported by the underlying numbers. We can acknowledge that Crosby's 2018 run was a good playoffs, but also admit that it was more down to luck in a small sample than any other reason. If we think about their even-strength on-ice percentages compared to their career numbers, Crosby's 21.1%, 23/109 is compared to 10.7%, his normal number would be 12, so he was on-ice for 11 extra goals in that 109 shot sample. Ovechkin's 12.4%, 17/137 is compared to 10.5%, his normal number would be 15, so he was on-ice for 2 extra goals in that 137 shot sample.

Returning to McDavid in 2023, he was unlucky at even-strength (his on-ice shooting percentage was 8.7 on a career of 11.2), but the Oilers went 18/39 on the power play in 12 games, and that shooting luck led to 12 of McDavid's 20 points. Their shooting percentage regressed to the mean the next year, which meant that they just went 22 for 75, a 29.3% clip instead of the 46.2% they had in 2023, but McDavid's even strength on-ice shooting percentage was 12.9%, so he went from 7 even strength points in 12 games to 25 even strength points in 25 games.

That's a neat breakdown and you bring some good stats.

Just to poke a bit: It seems shot quality is missing here. What if Crosby just so happened to make some great passes in the 2018 playoffs and the quality of these passes really did result in increased scoring which in that case would indeed be indicative of the quality of play? I mean, like you said, it's a small sample size. What if he just so happened to make an extraordinary quantity of great passes in that sample?

 

[Gorskyontario]

Good thing no one here thinks McDavid or across is Gretzky level then.

My only point was that Henrik Sedin's Art Ross was not weak. It was more productive than McDavid's first 2 Art Ross seasons, and he did it in a lower scoring season.

Crosby in 2009-10 was also just a year older than McDavid's 2nd art Ross win, it's not hard to imagine 22 year old Crosby wasn't at his peak yet, just like how McDavid's first 2 Art Ross wins are not necessarily his stronger seasons.

McDavid is closer to Gretzky(5 vs 9 scoring titles) than Crosby(2 scoring titles).


People can cope about McDavid all they want, but he is the best player since Mario Lemieux.

 

[Felidae]

McDavid is closer to Gretzky(5 vs 9 scoring titles) than Crosby(2 scoring titles).

Uh, I mean just going by your logic there's 4 scoring titles separating McDavid and Gretzky. 3 separating McDavid and Crosby..

Also, are we really trophy counting here? It ignores a crapton of context, otherwise you'd arrive to the conclusion that Martin St Louis is better than Ovechkin and on par with Crosby

People can cope about McDavid all they want, but he is the best player since Mario Lemieux.

I mean, I probably have a few players i'd currently rank higher in an all time sense, but no disagreement here.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Thank you for being one of the few objective posters in this thread who is willing to apply reasonable analysis to both players vs. cherrypicking metrics when it suits to make an argument against Crosby.

Lmao, pot meet kettle.
Which is exactly what you’re doing, cherry picking.

Still waiting for you to answer question, why aren’t you comparing 4 rounds vs 4 rounds for each player, instead of cherry picking 3 rounds. Yet you continue to bob and weave and dodge the question, despite being asked numerous times.

 

[Video Nasty]

I'll give you Benn, since even going by adjusted stats it's one of the weakest art Ross wins. I don't know why Henrik Sedin's season is always lumped in with weak Art Ross wins though.

He had the highest EVP in a season this century and it took scoring going up by quite a bit for it to be surpassed.

Sedin's overall career is on the weaker side for Art Ross winners, but the season he actually won was a strong one

If people lump Henrik Sedin in with the weak Art Ross wins pool, I think they’re doing so for three reasons.

1. Ovechkin missed 10 games and would have swept all the hardware for a third year in a row. Crosby had an excellent year as well. Malkin was a non-factor after an absolutely magnificent 2008-2009. The same season in which Malkin, Ovechkin, and Crosby ranked 1-2-3 in the scoring race, I think we all thought there would be years to come of it. There’s lingering disappointment how rarely that ever ended up happening (I believe this was the only such occurrence). It doesn’t help either that Ovechkin fell over a cliff the following season and Crosby and Malkin each only played half a season, which right or wrong, probably diminishes his brother’s win (among the crowd even arguing this to begin with) and since they are so often looked at as a package deal, that mindset continues.

2. Sedin had a less traditional path to his peak season. He was already 29 entering the 2009-2010 season and had been around a PPG player leading up to it. He ended up having a very good 2010-2011 as well. But we can look back with hindsight and see that he had a perfect storm season in 2009-2010. It’s always a little disappointing when we see the absolute elite lose out on hardware, for whatever reasons, to clearly inferior players. This invites criticism of McDavid, but either Sedin is hardly a Kucherov or even MacKinnon.

3. Sedin never really created the mystique needed to make people see his win (same with his brother) as anything more than a one off. There was a random explosion and then a fairly quick dip back to being around a PPG player. Winning a second scoring race always does wonders, as well as having any playoff success.

All that being said, I think the player should always get some extra credit if they pluck scoring race wins during a time with some of the best players of all-time. I remember enjoying the Sedins immensely in their back to back really good years.

 

[overpass]

We can acknowledge that Crosby's 2018 run was a good playoffs, but also admit that it was more down to luck in a small sample than any other reason.

I'm curious what your model of luck includes. To my eye, Crosby beats the goalie cleanly on 7 of his 8 EV goals.

Here are his 8 EV goals.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Goals 1 and 3 were perfectly placed tips. No chance for the goalie. What part of these goals would you call lucky?

Goals 2 and 6, Crosby was wide open beside the net and shot it into the open net. That looks like a high percentage chance to me, not a lucky shot. Is he lucky that the Flyers didn't cover him? Is there any skill involved in finding open space?

Goals 4 and 5 were wraparounds. Was Crosby lucky that it was Shayne Gostisbehere failing to defend both of them? Or is it to his credit that he recognized the opportunity and executed perfectly?

Goal 8 was a perfect finish by Crosby on a cross-ice pass. No chance for the goalie to stop it. Wasn't that just a very high percentage chance created and executed successfully by Guentzel and Crosby? Or was Crosby lucky that Dmitry Orlov was beaten so badly by Guentzel?

The only goal I would characterize as lucky was his 7th, where Ovechkin bobbled the cross ice pass right to Crosby's stick and then Crosby shot it through Holtby.

 

[Vilica]

I'm curious what your model of luck includes. To my eye, Crosby beats the goalie cleanly on 7 of his 8 EV goals.

Here are his 8 EV goals.

Goals 1 and 3 were perfectly placed tips. No chance for the goalie. What part of these goals would you call lucky?

Goals 2 and 6, Crosby was wide open beside the net and shot it into the open net. That looks like a high percentage chance to me, not a lucky shot. Is he lucky that the Flyers didn't cover him? Is there any skill involved in finding open space?

Goals 4 and 5 were wraparounds. Was Crosby lucky that it was Shayne Gostisbehere failing to defend both of them? Or is it to his credit that he recognized the opportunity and executed perfectly?

Goal 8 was a perfect finish by Crosby on a cross-ice pass. No chance for the goalie to stop it. Wasn't that just a very high percentage chance created and executed successfully by Guentzel and Crosby? Or was Crosby lucky that Dmitry Orlov was beaten so badly by Guentzel?

The only goal I would characterize as lucky was his 7th, where Ovechkin bobbled the cross ice pass right to Crosby's stick and then Crosby shot it through Holtby.

The luck I'm referring to is not in anyway related to whether or not Crosby's actual goals were lucky in any fashion, but is more accurately termed cluster luck. In Crosby's regular season career, he's been on-ice for 1151 goals at even strength, and his on-ice shooting percentage is 10.7%, which implies there have been 10757 shots on goal while Crosby has been on-ice at even strength between the 07-08 seasons and the 23-24 seasons. You can break that down into smaller buckets, whether that be 1000 shots, 100 shots, or 10 shots - you'd expect on average 107 goals in a 1000 shot sample, 10.7 goals in a 100 shot sample, and 1.07 goals in a 10 shot sample, but obviously you're not going to have exactly 1 goal every 10 shots in a random sample. In the 2018 playoffs, in a 109 shot sample, Crosby had 23 pucks go in, in the 2019/2021 playoffs, in a 112 shot sample, Crosby had 5 pucks go in. His expectation for those samples would be 11-12 goals, the differences between the samples is just variance, which you could also call randomness, or luck.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

These are Crosby's official shot charts, regular season and playoffs, though we only have shot data from 09-10 on, where you have tiny sample sizes each year, and look at the variation year-over-year. You can look at the 2018 playoffs, and see just how few of each shot type we're dealing with. In an 11 shot sample of wrist shots, where Crosby expected to score 1.375, instead he scored 3. In the 12 games that year, Crosby went 2-2 on wraparounds, in the 119 other games in the sample, he had 4 total wraparound shots. I don't know how you credit those goals to anything but luck. In Crosby's 982 regular season games, he has 3 wraparound goals on 28 shots. It's a tiny tiny sample.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Uh, I mean just going by your logic there's 4 scoring titles separating McDavid and Gretzky. 3 separating McDavid and Crosby..

Also, are we really trophy counting here? It ignores a crapton of context, otherwise you'd arrive to the conclusion that Martin St Louis is better than Ovechkin and on par with Crosby

Martin St Louis won one of his Art Ross trophies primarily because Crosby was hurt. I don't believe McDavid is done winning scoring titles yet, people still can't grasp the talent they are seeing.


I would absolutely take St Louis above Ovechkin. I don't care what stat counters say, I consider the way Ovechkin plays the game shameful.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Martin St Louis won one of his Art Ross trophies primarily because Crosby was hurt. I don't believe McDavid is done winning scoring titles yet, people still can't grasp the talent they are seeing.


I absolutely take St Louis above Ovechkin. I don't care what stat counters say, I consider the way Ovechkin plays the game shameful.

Good thing you aren’t a GM

 

[Gorskyontario]

Good thing you aren’t a GM

He might break Gretzky's record, but he's spent almost 20 years floating around cherry picking. Be impressed if you want but his overall game is a joke.

 

[GreatGonzo]

He might break Gretzky's record, but he's spent almost 20 years floating around cherry picking. Be impressed if you want but his overall game is a joke.

Quite a “joke” of a career he’s had..being arguably the best goal scorer of all time and the 2nd best player of his generation….

What a loser…

 

[frontsfan67]

I just read a good amount of this thread.

Have any of you considered the possibility Daver is trolling lol?

Sorry but had to be said.

09 Crosby got carried by Malkin in the finals.
24 McDavid carried draisaitl. McDavid only got outscored this playoff run by Gretzky and Lemieux who are unarguably the 2 best forwards ever.

 

[DitchMarner]

I just read a good amount of this thread.

Have any of you considered the possibility Daver is trolling lol?

Sorry but had to be said.

09 Crosby got carried by Malkin in the finals.
24 McDavid carried draisaitl. McDavid only got outscored this playoff run by Gretzky and Lemieux who are unarguably the 2 best forwards ever.

He's not trolling. His problem is he makes it very obvious he's not objective when it comes to discussions involving Crosby. He has sense in general. I've read decent posts by him. But he makes himself look silly when he makes threads like this one. Just read some of his posts in this thread and count the number of times he applies one standard for one player and a different (if not opposite) one for another. Examples: Glorifying a three-point game for Crosby in a blowout win after stating McDavid's scoring in the SCF is overrated based on point totals (he's been going on about how many of his points in the series aren't important because they came in blow out wins for a while) and saying that Crosby's performance in the 2018 playoffs is arguably as impressive as McDavid's performance in the 2022 playoffs even though Crosby scored a third of his points in the 2018 playoffs in two blowout wins in round one.

Perhaps that's more likely to happen when you start with the assumption that something must be a fact and then try to finding supporting evidence instead of doing an objective evaluation and then drawing conclusions.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Quite a “joke” of a career he’s had..being arguably the best goal scorer of all time and the 2nd best player of his generation….

What a loser…

The most 1 dimensional player of all time. Pardon me for not being overly impressed by 50 goal 20 assist seasons, lol.