Top NHL player in the 21st Century so far? #1(Inspired by ESPN ranking)

[Empoleon8771]

McDavid is better than Crosby ever was.

And yet Crosby has still had the better career than McDavid, so he's the answer to this question.

 

[HFpapi]

I'm a Crosby nut hugger so this is zero bias but the only argument for Crosby > McDavid is team awards.

Considering McDavid just won the Conn Smythe with the 3rd highest playoff point total ever, considering his last 3 consecutive playoff performances are as good if not better than any 3 from Crosby, and considering it's not McDavid's fault the NHL hasn't gone to the Olympics since 2014, it's a weak argument.

One on one, player vs player, not sure how McDavid isn't clearly better. 5 Ross vs 2. 3 Hart vs 2. McDavid is only 27, literally dead smack in the middle of his prime. He might have 3-4 more scoring titles and 2-3 more MVP's in him.

McDavid is the 5th best player already and still rising.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Literally no one gives a shit whether Crosby finished behind Benn and Tavares for an Art Ross trophy 10 years ago.

Welcome to the world of rating players - not by their best accomplishments - but by their worst seasons.

You can thank your fellow Crosby fans for rampantly supporting that particular piece of reasoning for well over a decade now.

I'm a Crosby nut hugger so this is zero bias but the only argument for Crosby > McDavid is team awards.

Considering McDavid just won the Conn Smythe with the 3rd highest playoff point total ever, considering his last 3 consecutive playoff performances are as good if not better than any 3 from Crosby, and considering it's not McDavid's fault the NHL hasn't gone to the Olympics since 2014, it's a weak argument.

One on one, player vs player, not sure how McDavid isn't clearly better. 5 Ross vs 2. 3 Hart vs 2. McDavid is only 27, literally dead smack in the middle of his prime. He might have 3-4 more scoring titles and 2-3 more MVP's in him.

McDavid is the 5th best player already and still rising.

If McDavid dies today, Crosby has obviously had the better career.

But a lot of people in hockey care nothing for longevity and only care about peak, and McDavid certainly has that over Sid.

 

[HFpapi]

Welcome to the world of rating players - not by their best accomplishments - but by their worst seasons.

You can thank your fellow Crosby fans for rampantly supporting that particular piece of reasoning for well over a decade now.



If McDavid dies today, Crosby has obviously had the better career.

But a lot of people in hockey care nothing for longevity and only care about peak, and McDavid certainly has that over Sid.

I'll reiterate my point then. Why "obviously" a better career if we are ranking individual players. Crosby only has team awards over McDavid. Are we really going to hold it against McDavid that his team didn't win a cup when he made it to game 7 of the finals with 42 points in 25 games? Like what more could he have done?

Also, 2 Olympic golds. McDavid hasn't had the opportunity and even in 2010 with the golden goal acclaim, Crosby was downright mediocre that tournament for those that remember.

I love Crosby so I hate arguing against him but anyone with 2 eyes and 2 brain cells can watch hockey and notice that individually McDavid is better.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I'll reiterate my point then. Why "obviously" a better career if we are ranking individual players. Crosby only has team awards over McDavid.

Nah, the team argument is dumb.

What Sid has over McDavid (for now) is 19 seasons vs 9, 1600 points vs 1000, 600 goals vs 335 (an adjustment is probably warranted too since the scoring environment changed.

If you're a GM choosing between those two things, you're taking the 19/1600/600.

 

[DitchMarner]

Welcome to the world of rating players - not by their best accomplishments - but by their worst seasons.

You can thank your fellow Crosby fans for rampantly supporting that particular piece of reasoning for well over a decade now.



If McDavid dies today, Crosby has obviously had the better career.

But a lot of people in hockey care nothing for longevity and only care about peak, and McDavid certainly has that over Sid.

I wish people who put Crosby ahead all-time would just say he has better longevity. It's not like there's any shame in that. Gordie Howe was dominant at his peak and then a top five player for ages and he's considered part of the Big Four.

Why not simply say Crosby has the better career because it is twice as long and he has consistently performed at a high level instead of all this, "He's a waaaayyy better leader/much more of a winner/much better defensively" type stuff?

 

[Midnight Judges]

I wish people who put Crosby ahead all-time would just say he has better longevity. It's not there's any shame in that. Gordie Howe was dominant at his peak and then a top five player for ages and he's considered part of the Big Four.

Why not simply say Crosby has the better career because it is twice as long and he has consistently performed at a high level instead of all this, "He's a waaaayyy better leader/much more of a winner/much better defensively" type stuff?

No idea.

Longevity is a solid argument IMO - real value provided to the team (which is kinda the whole point). Unfortunately, in hockey, and hockey alone, it gets discounted.

 

[HFpapi]

Nah, the team argument is dumb.

What Sid has over McDavid (for now) is 19 seasons vs 9, 1600 points vs 1000, 600 goals vs 335 (an adjustment is probably warranted too since the scoring environment changed.

If you're a GM choosing between those two things, you're taking the 19/1600/600.

Ok, I will concede that "19 seasons vs 9" is jarring and makes me reconsider. That said, I think ranking a player has to strike a fine balance between prioritising peak while considering longevity.

You can't have only peak and zero longevity (Tim Thomas) or only longevity and no peak (Marleau) to be an all-time great. There comes a certain point though where you've seen a high enough peak over a long enough time span to know what you have. Case in point Bobby Orr. McDavid has already played as many games as Orr.

I'm not sure McDavid needs much more compiling to be rightfully called the 5th best player ever.

 

[Voight]

If Hank is there so should Price

He really shouldn't be.

Price was fantastic in 2015, but it A) was one of two he was even nominated for the Vezina and B) his play that year is comparable with Lundqvist in 2012.

 

[ElLeetch]

McD, provided he avoids bad injuries, will be better than all of them, easily.

 

[Video Nasty]

I wish people who put Crosby ahead all-time would just say he has better longevity. It's not there's any shame in that. Gordie Howe was dominant at his peak and then a top five player for ages and he's considered part of the Big Four.

Why not simply say Crosby has the better career because it is twice as long and he has consistently performed at a high level instead of all this, "He's a waaaayyy better leader/much more of a winner/much better defensively" type stuff?

Well said. In a positive twist of fate, what was once seen as a huge weakness when it came to Crosby, his inability to stay on the ice, has morphed into one of the greatest bullet points on his resume. Since missing 60 games in 2011-2012, he has missed just 73 games total over the past 12 seasons.

Do we ever hear about him bucking expectations in terms of play time past 2012? Do we ever hear about he has clawed back some mystique by being very good to excellent during that entire time frame?

Nope. Just what ifs, exaggerations, and flat out lies. Crosby fans are the most guilty party in these debates. They invite the criticism because of their changing values over the course of his entire career, based on what he did or didn’t do, of course.

 

[HabzSauce]

He really shouldn't be.

Price was fantastic in 2015, but it A) was one of two he was even nominated for the Vezina and B) his play that year is comparable with Lundqvist in 2012.

Price was voted best "player" in the world that year, even over Sid. That godly performance got him a Vezina, Hart, Ted Lindsay & Jennings. Hank in 2012 was insane I remember watching him but not in same realm as 2015 price

 

[Sasha Orlov]

I wish people who put Crosby ahead all-time would just say he has better longevity. It's not like there's any shame in that. Gordie Howe was dominant at his peak and then a top five player for ages and he's considered part of the Big Four.

Why not simply say Crosby has the better career because it is twice as long and he has consistently performed at a high level instead of all this, "He's a waaaayyy better leader/much more of a winner/much better defensively" type stuff?

Bro out here asking for honesty on HF, we’re hitting rock bottom folks

 

[wetcoast]

If it's peak/on ice play, it's definitely McDavid. If it's career, probably Crosby. I'll wait for the OP to clarify

It's not a peak poll it's everything this century in the NHL.

 

[wetcoast]

I'm in nightshift so I'll do the next poll probably on saturday and it would be a very interesting and closer one.

I'm also leaning on adding 2 more players next poll in Kuch and Price although neither one should be getting votes for a couple of polls.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'll reiterate my point then. Why "obviously" a better career if we are ranking individual players. Crosby only has team awards over McDavid. Are we really going to hold it against McDavid that his team didn't win a cup when he made it to game 7 of the finals with 42 points in 25 games? Like what more could he have done?

Also, 2 Olympic golds. McDavid hasn't had the opportunity and even in 2010 with the golden goal acclaim, Crosby was downright mediocre that tournament for those that remember.

I love Crosby so I hate arguing against him but anyone with 2 eyes and 2 brain cells can watch hockey and notice that individually McDavid is better.

If McDavid suddenly retired today, Crosby would absolutely be considered to having a better career than him. It doesn't matter if McDavid didn't have the chance to accrue the awards that Crosby accrued, Crosby actually did it when McDavid didn't.

I wish people who put Crosby ahead all-time would just say he has better longevity. It's not like there's any shame in that. Gordie Howe was dominant at his peak and then a top five player for ages and he's considered part of the Big Four.

Why not simply say Crosby has the better career because it is twice as long and he has consistently performed at a high level instead of all this, "He's a waaaayyy better leader/much more of a winner/much better defensively" type stuff?

Is this something that is particularly debated? I feel like most fans realize that McDavid peaked higher than Crosby, but what's keeping Crosby ahead of McDavid at this point is that Crosby has essentially a full career of top level play plus a ton of cup wins.

I think most fans who put Crosby ahead of McDavid are in the "Crosby has been more accomplished but McDavid is on pace to overtake him" thought. That's pretty much exactly where I'm at.

 

[Grifter3511]

Crosby. Too many kiddos on here didn’t experience prime Sid and only see fancy Connor.

I saw plenty of prime Crosby and as a Rangers fan I was always more worried when Malkin was on the ice. But if I were to vote I'd vote Crosby atm because his career is basically over and McDs is only approaching 50%.

 

[Video Nasty]

Crosby. Too many kiddos on here didn’t experience prime Sid and only see fancy Connor.

Crosby has pulled 2/3rds of the vote, so relax. He has still captured the hearts of Hfboards for now.

Maybe people are picking McDavid because he stirs up similar feelings that they experienced while watching Gretzky and Lemieux. I never felt that from Crosby. Malkin evoked Lemieux a time or two though.

Fortunately, McDavid has already dusted him or is on track to annihilate him in hardware, accolades, and accomplishments by the time it’s said and done.

 

[blundluntman]

It's not a peak poll it's everything this century in the NHL.

Best player could mean strictly which player was best on the ice without taking career accomplishments into account. That's what I meant when I said peak.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Crosby obviously

 

[Gurglesons]

Crosby has pulled 2/3rds of the vote, so relax. He has still captured the hearts of Hfboards for now.

Maybe people are picking McDavid because he stirs up similar feelings that they experienced while watching Gretzky and Lemieux. I never felt that from Crosby. Malkin evoked Lemieux a time or two though.

Fortunately, McDavid has already dusted him or is on track to annihilate him in hardware, accolades, and accomplishments by the time it’s said and done.

Lemieux didn’t lose Art Ross trophies to Kucherov level players.

 

[Video Nasty]

Lemieux didn’t lose Art Ross trophies to Kucherov level players.

Yet here we are, watching McDavid rocket towards the better career between the two. All this talk about who we would take when drafting. I’ll take the guy who plays the games and stays committed to conditioning. And that’s coming from someone who knows Lemieux was the better player and has him second only to Gretzky as a personal favorite, but I have to call it as I see it.

 

[Gurglesons]

Yet here we are, watching McDavid rocket towards the better career between the two. All this talk about who we would take when drafting. I’ll take the guy who plays the games and stays committed to conditioning. And that’s coming from someone who knows Lemieux was the better player and has him second only to Gretzky as a personal favorite, but I have to call it as I see it.

I'll take the one with two rings.

McDavid gets one we can start the comparisons as someone who got into the game of hockey because of Lemieux despite my dad being a Flyers fan.

 

[Bruinswillwin77]

Voted Crosby. 100%

Would have loved to vote Bergeron but like Felger always says "there was someone always better "

And he's not wrong.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Voted for McDavid, even though I wanted to pick Crosby, but I just can’t.

McDavid has bested Crosby on every level in a span of 9 years and has already accomplished more. The Stanley Cup win will only be the cherry on top a few years from now.

I get that Crosby has the edge in longevity, but it’s not the end-all, be-all when comparing players. I value impact on the game higher than longevity. That’s why I would still consider Gretzky as the GOAT had he retired in 1988 at the end of his run with the Oilers.