The 5th best player ever is ...

[wetcoast]

you are joking,right?

Orr, Bourque, Shore just for starters..I'm not a big Phil fan he scored points with Orr but has some serious red flags in his resume.

 

[Video Nasty]

5 Art Ross Trophy's
2 Harts
2 Lesters
2 Stanley Cup wins
76 goals in 78 games one season
5 years where he averaged 65 goals per season
1590 all time points.
His peak numbers are much better than Crosby ever had.
Sounds like a pretty good resume.

The hockey world is a negative hive mind when it comes to Esposito. Too many people think he was merely a by-product of Orr. I don’t agree that he’s 6th all-time, but it has always felt a bit wrong that he’s not inside the top 20 any longer, even with additions like Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid.

So I see that you can look up counting stats without context and what was he like without Bobby Orr?

What context would that be?

Would it be his overall 7th place finish in the scoring race and the 49 points in his final 43 games of his final season with Chicago when only 3 players topped 65 points for the entire season?

Would it be the 32 points in 24 games played without Orr during Orr’s second season?

Like how Esposito led the league in assists and points during Orr’s 3rd season and nearly doubled him in points while playing just 7 more games?

Or was it the 13 goals and 23 points in 15 games without Orr in 1972-1973?

Or the 3 separate seasons Esposito finished higher in Hart voting?

Or is it still being an excellent player for the Rangers when during a time that being age 33 and beyond on mediocre to bad teams actually meant your game declined naturally?

It tends to be forgotten, but how about this for context? Esposito was second only to Howe in career goals and points, and 3rd in career assists to Howe and Mikita, when he retired.

He also owned the top 2 spots for most points in a season, owned the single season goals record, and hit 60+ goals in a season 4 times before anyone else did it once.

Just because Gretzky came and obliterated his marks and there was no time for all his totals to sit and breath for a moment, doesn’t mean he was some merely good player who was lucky enough to play with Orr.

 

[wetcoast]

The hockey world is a negative hive mind when it comes to Esposito. Too many people think he was merely a by-product of Orr. I don’t agree that he’s 6th all-time, but it has always felt a bit wrong that he’s not inside the top 20 any longer, even with additions like Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid.

He has long been over rated simply due to counting stats IMO.

What context would that be?

Would it be his overall 7th place finish in the scoring race and the 49 points in his final 43 games of his final season with Chicago when only 3 players topped 65 points for the entire season?

Sure and he was playing on a line with Bobby Hull and had a big donut in the playoffs over 6 games.

Would it be the 32 points in 24 games played without Orr during Orr’s second season?

People point to this always like it's a big gotchya moment, Phil was still the slot machine who took way more SOG than anyone else on the Bruins team and his wingers were good corner men.

Like how Esposito led the league in assists and points during Orr’s 3rd season and nearly doubled him in points while playing just 7 more games?

Orr was already tilting the ice and led the league with a +55 that season, Phil provided points in a larger role in Boston but provided little else

Or was it the 13 goals and 23 points in 15 games without Orr in 1972-1973?

See above.

Or the 3 separate seasons Esposito finished higher in Hart voting?

Do you actually think that Phil was more valuable or better than Orr in those seasons as a player?

Or is it still being an excellent player for the Rangers when during a time that being age 33 and beyond on mediocre to bad teams actually meant your game declined naturally?

I hear this argument all of the time the center he was traded for, Jean Ratelle, who was 2 years older out produced him.

Yes the NYR were bad teams because they had good offensive players like Phil and Ron Greschner ect who were happy to score points, especially on the PP but were not great 2 way players.

It tends to be forgotten, but how about this for context? Esposito was second only to Howe in career goals and points, and 3rd in career assists to Howe and Mikita, when he retired.

Sure we all know how scoring exploded in the 70's with expansion and talent dilution with the WHA.

Imagine how highly we would speak of Bernie Nicholls had he played with Wayne for more than a season and a half?

He also owned the top 2 spots for most points in a season, owned the single season goals record, and hit 60+ goals in a season 4 times before anyone else did it once.

Yet everyone acknowledges that Orr was the best player on that team and he drove the bus, stirred the drink ect...

Just because Gretzky came and obliterated his marks and there was no time for all his totals to sit and breath for a moment, doesn’t mean he was some merely good player who was lucky enough to play with Orr.

The thing is that he was a very good offensive player who played with Bobby Orr and Bobby Hull before that and scored some points in the later 70s in a really weak NHL and was a piss poor 2 way player.

People need to look beyond the counting stats and look at the whole picture with Phil.

 

[KevinRedkey]

What's the difference between best ever and best career?

Ridiculous example, but if a rookie scored 400 points in 82 games before suffering a career ending injury before he was able to win a cup - I think most would consider him to be the best player ever, while having a much worse career than many others.

In regards to a more realistic example - many believe McDavid is better than Crosby is/was, but Crosby has had the better career thus far. Obviously they are both still playing, and that all may (or may not) change.

 

[Seanaconda]

So why isn't McDavid on the polls ? He has more hardware than most and obv other guys that aren't retired are options

 

[Ben White]

Hilarious to don’t have an Other option and to don’t have McDavid as an option. Voted Jagr but should be McDavid.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Nobody is saying Adin Hill is the 5th best player of all time. Is there anyone even in the top 25 of all time that has never won a cup, let alone top 10 or top 5?

McDavid

 

[wetcoast]

Ridiculous example, but if a rookie scored 400 points in 82 games before suffering a career ending injury before he was able to win a cup - I think most would consider him to be the best player ever, while having a much worse career than many others.

In regards to a more realistic example - many believe McDavid is better than Crosby is/was, but Crosby has had the better career thus far. Obviously they are both still playing, and that all may (or may not) change.

So better offensive peak is the Coles note version?

I'm not buying that as the better okay is one who is better for longer and has the better overall career IMO otherwise short term superstars would be considered Gretzky, Orr and Howe are considered by almost everyone as 3 of the best players of all time bot simply for their peaks but consistency of excellence.

That's truly what separates then from the pack for me.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

McDavid

No serious voter is going to put McDavid in the top 10 without a cup. It was a requirement for Ovechkin, it’s a requirement for McDavid. McDavid doesn’t belong in the top 10 yet. He certainly hasn’t passed Ovechkin, cup or no cup.

 

[wetcoast]

You literally said McDavid hasn’t achieved anything in his career so I’m not sure how you expect to be taken seriously

In the quote you are referring to he said no such thing, perhaps you were thinking of a different quote?

Otherwise his comment was more true than yours as this is what you quoted,

No serious voter is going to put McDavid in the top 10 without a cup. It was a requirement for Ovechkin, it’s a requirement for McDavid. McDavid doesn’t belong in the top 10 yet. He certainly hasn’t passed Ovechkin, cup or no cup.

So go back to the part in bold and look at the quote...

For the record I don't think that McDavid needs a SC to become a top 10 player.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

In the quote you are referring to he said no such thing, perhaps you were thinking of a different quote?

If McDavid accomplishes a damn thing by the end of his career. And save me the “it’s a team game” bullshit. Save that rhetoric for someone who cares on here, the voters won’t.

 

[PensandCaps]

Clearly Sid. and he's #4.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

You literally said McDavid hasn’t achieved anything in his career so I’m not sure how you expect to be taken seriously

I’m clearly talking about cups, nothing more. Of course he has award accomplishments, but the name of the game is to win the cup.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

I’m clearly talking about cups, nothing more. Of course he has award accomplishments, but the name of the game is to win the cup.

Sure man

 

[Xspyrit]

I'm the first one to voted for McDavid

Not sure why he wasn't an option right away

 

[powerbomb]

Sigh, a mistake by OP/mods to budge and put McDavid on the poll. In the first place, not having him as an option for three days results in skewed results for anyone discovering this thread at a glance later; in the second place, no 26-year old belongs on the Mt. Rushmore of their sport because it's the presumption of what fans expect the next dozen years of a career to yield rather than a cogent comparison of factuals.

You've settled for the worst of both worlds.

 

[Video Nasty]

Sigh, a mistake by OP/mods to budge and put McDavid on the poll. In the first place, not having him as an option for three days results in skewed results for anyone discovering this thread at a glance later; in the second place, no 26-year old belongs on the Mt. Rushmore of their sport because it's the presumption of what fans expect the next dozen years of a career to yield rather than a cogent comparison of factuals.

You've settled for the worst of both worlds.

I agree with the mistake of adding McDavid days after the fact.

But for the bolded, Orr and Gretzky were certainly on theirs at that age.

 

[powerbomb]

I agree with the mistake of adding McDavid days after the fact.

But for the bolded, Orr and Gretzky were certainly on theirs at that age.

By the age of 26, Orr and Gretzky were multiple time champions who redefined their position with unprecedented levels of dominance. In effect, they bulldozed whatever Mt. Rushmore may have existed in that time, setting a new golden standard that has not and frankly cannot be matched. Short of torching the record books in similar fashion, no one that age can reasonably be considered worthy of being alongside the completed careers of such legendary players.

If McDavid retired today, he would not be in the conversation for enshrinement as the 5th best player of all-time. He's still working on his legacy. In ten years, with a better context of and appreciation for what he and his contemporaries have achieved, we will see.

*discards toothpick by firing it into a dart board*

...but I'm not really expecting reason to prevail.

*shrugs, morphs into a ball and rolls away*

 

[Xspyrit]

no 26-year old belongs on the Mt. Rushmore of their sport because it's the presumption of what fans expect the next dozen years of a career to yield rather than a cogent comparison of factuals.

Of course it's assuming McDavid continues to be a dominant player. But do you know that he is currently 134th in all-time scoring at 26 y/o?

He might be close to the top-100 by the end of the season

Only 3 players have a better PPG than him actually : Gretzky, Lemieux and Bossy who all played in the highest scoring era

NHL All-Time Points per Game Leaders

NHL players who hold the all-time record for the most points per game in NHL. All-time points per game leaders for NHL players.

www.quanthockey.com

 

[Video Nasty]

By the age of 26, Orr and Gretzky were multiple time champions who redefined their position with unprecedented levels of dominance. In effect, they bulldozed whatever Mt. Rushmore may have existed in that time, setting a new golden standard that has not and frankly cannot be matched. Short of torching the record books in similar fashion, no one that age can reasonably be considered worthy of being alongside the completed careers of such legendary players.

If McDavid retired today, he would not be in the conversation for enshrinement as the 5th best player of all-time. He's still working on his legacy. In ten years, with a better context of and appreciation for what he and his contemporaries have achieved, we will see.

*discards toothpick by firing it into a dart board*

...but I'm not really expecting reason to prevail.

*shrugs, morphs into a ball and rolls away*

I’m only responding to your point of “no 26 year old”. I’m not making the case that McDavid is #5 as of today. I must have misunderstood the context behind your statement.

Either way, I suspect that McDavid will be approaching near consensus #5 within 3 more seasons. I expect him to win a Cup before he enters his age 30 campaign.

Everything else beyond is him making a very real case to stack up against the elite longevity of Howe and if that is enough for some to put him over the better players who played shorter careers like Orr and Lemieux when it’s all said and done.

But as you said, some of this is still too early, even though he’s more clearly on his way than anyone else since, which is why I agreed that inserting McDavid into the poll days later was the wrong move.

 

[Video Nasty]

Of course it's assuming McDavid continues to be a dominant player. But do you know that he is currently 134th in all-time scoring at 26 y/o?

He might be close to the top-100 by the end of the season

Only 3 players have a better PPG than him actually : Gretzky, Lemieux and Bossy who all played in the highest scoring era

NHL All-Time Points per Game Leaders

NHL players who hold the all-time record for the most points per game in NHL. All-time points per game leaders for NHL players.

www.quanthockey.com

McDavid is building the kind of first half career buffer where he could conceivably never be below 5th in career PPG, if he has a full 18-20 season career. Until a few seasons ago, I never even considered that he could briefly be ahead of Bossy around the 600 game mark; he’s only fractions of a point behind as of today.

 

[Midnight Judges]

No serious voter is going to put McDavid in the top 10 without a cup.

No single player has ever carried a team to a cup.

Building a cup winner is a GM's job. Playing to the best of their abilities and contributing to the team is a player's job. McDavid has contributed, on a per-season basis, as much as just about any player in history minus Wayne Gretzky. McDavid has also been a very good playoff performer.

Nevermind that one's chances of winning a cup were 500%+ higher back when there were 6 teams vs today's 32.

Your criteria is largely arbitrary.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

So by your criteria, Adin Hill is a better goalkeeper than Henrik Lundquist because he won a cup. Makes sense

I'm the first person to say this team sport and Cups don't mean everything in player evaluation but this argument is really silly. No one is comparing McDavid to a 4th liner that won a cup but there are enough great players that it's a pretty significant tiebreaker or even some with 90% of his skill with rings could rationally be taken in from of him.

 

[Beau Knows]

Probably Crosby.

There's a good chance it'll be McDavid when he's finished.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

I’m clearly talking about cups, nothing more. Of course he has award accomplishments, but the name of the game is to win the cup.

Kirk Maltby>Sidney Crosby