Where will Connor McDavid rank all-time by the time he retires?

[lawrence]

2nd or 3rd best player of all time. If hes able to avoid injuries he will surpass Lemiuex.

 

[DJB]

He has to win a Cup for me to even consider him top 5.

 

[WalterLundy]

ma
Lemieux was the answer to can there be another gretzky talent

He showed that it’s possible for a player to have two Gretzky level seasons (89 and 93) but even though he was closest offensively he didn’t peak as high. He also had no hope of actually passing him all time or with total amount of crazy seasons. The thing is we are talking about surpassing Gretzky and where Lemieux has 2 seasons in that realm, Gretzky had at least triple the amount. I do get your point though. Also we have to remember that Gretzky and Lemieux played in the same era and that in order to do what Gretzky did in todays game (relatively) just seems more far fetched. I just don’t see someone averaging 150 points per season in todays game for 12 years in a row because that’s what it would take to be relatively as good as Gretzky was from 1980-1991. Nobody ever showed that.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

3rd best forward ever

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

He showed that it’s possible for a player to have two Gretzky level seasons (89 and 93) but even though he was closest offensively he didn’t peak as high. He also had no hope of actually passing him all time or with total amount of crazy seasons. The thing is we are talking about surpassing Gretzky and where Lemieux has 2 seasons in that realm, Gretzky had at least triple the amount. I do get your point though. Also we have to remember that Gretzky and Lemieux played in the same era and that in order to do what Gretzky did in todays game (relatively) just seems more far fetched. I just don’t see someone averaging 150 points per season in todays game for 12 years in a row because that’s what it would take to be relatively as good as Gretzky was from 1980-1991. Nobody ever showed that.

Gretzky is the only player to hit 200. Lemieux hit 199 in 76. Next closest is 155.
Gretzky has a 51 game point streak lemieux has a 46
Gretzky had 47 point playoff run mario had 44
Highest ppg seasons
Gretzky 2.77
Gretzky 2.69
Mario 2.67
Wayne 2.65
Mario 2 62
Wayne 2.60

Also marios 95-96 is right up there with any wayne season. And since you know about adjusted stats. Is the highest adjusted of all time. Similar scoring to todays league. 161 in 70. Thats 189 points. 96 season is also better than any season mcdavid has had and thats at 30 with a bad back. Mario n wayne were rivals n were seen at the same lefel. Lets not rewrite history.

 

[WalterLundy]

Gretzky is the only player to hit 200. Lemieux hit 199 in 76. Next closest is 155.
Gretzky has a 51 game point streak lemieux has a 46
Gretzky had 47 point playoff run mario had 44
Highest ppg seasons
Gretzky 2.77
Gretzky 2.69
Mario 2.67
Wayne 2.65
Mario 2 62
Wayne 2.60

Also marios 95-96 is right up there with any wayne season. And since you know about adjusted stats. Is the highest adjusted of all time. Similar scoring to todays league. 161 in 70. Thats 189 points. 96 season is also better than any season mcdavid has had and thats at 30 with a bad back. Mario n wayne were rivals n were seen at the same lefel. Lets not rewrite history.

I’m not rewriting history. My post was coherent and accurate with the history that unfolded. I lived it and watched it up close unlike you. We have discussed that aspect before. There is nothing inaccurate about what I said at all.

Gretzky had 190 and above 5 times with 200 and above 4 times. Lemieux had 190 and above once. Gretzky has 4 of the top 6 playoff seasons with Lemieux having 1. You posting that Gretzky has 4 of the top 6 ppg season actually reinforces my point of Lemieux reaching that level twice so not sure why that was posted.

Gretzky’s 51 game point streak was at a 3 ppg average (153 points) so leaving that out is important. The level at which he was playing at in 1984 was unmatched in league history. His peak season is above Mario’s especially in even games regular or adjusted. For example (60 games in 84 vs 60 games in 93 is clear as day). It just is what it is.

As for the 1996 season anyone who watched (and I did I was there for 11 games that year) can tell you that Mario was not at the 89 or 93 level. Clear difference. Nobody seriously believes 96 Lemieux is Mario’s best season let alone of all time and for good reason. Lemieux got the vast majority of his points in the first 48 team games that year when they gave out Powerplays like candy and the penguins were also scoring 5 goals per game. That was the most favorable environment of Lemieux’s career to rack up points in surrounded by a peak Jagr and Francis on that powerplay. No coincidence that after they stopped calling them and the league was starting to level out to 1997 level he had “only” 1.79 ppg in his final 29 games. He was also outdone that year at even strength points per game by Jagr (and nearly matched by Lindros) and for even strength point totals trailed Jagr, Lindros and fellow teammate (and non HOF player) Petr Nedved. Also he sat back to backs that year and had he played the more difficult games he sat we’d be looking at 175 ish points. People have hashed that out on here before.

For “adjusted stats” you are referencing hockey reference which was actually an extension of a baseball site who slapped together adjusted stats that the vast majority on here dismiss because they yield hideous results. So if you want to go with that then that’s your prerogative. That’s why posters better than I have made other adjustment methods that I’ve adopted that actually account for significantly more (vsx and EVG/PPG/SHG adjustments). By those metrics 1996 Lemieux is a great season but not close to the best ever. As for it being better than any of McDavid’s that’s not true to at least a portion of people that watched. 89 and 93 Lemieux are better but not 96. I saw 96 Lemieux, 21 and 23 McDavid and I take the McDavid years. Dominance over peers is similar, when adjusted to 2021 (EVG/PPG/SHG) Lemieux’s ppg becomes 1.90 virtually identical to McDavid with significantly more offensive support.

 

[nbwingsfan]

He’ll knock off Howe for #4 IMO, it’ll be really tough to beat Lemieux but could get there on longevity if he keeps a high level of play throughout.

Orr is tough to judge and can vary from list to list, but for me he’s a clear #2 who revolutioned the game. I can’t even fathom a D winning the Art Ross anymore.

Gretzky is just simply out of reach

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I’m not rewriting history. My post was coherent and accurate with the history that unfolded. I lived it and watched it up close unlike you. We have discussed that aspect before. There is nothing inaccurate about what I said at all.

Gretzky had 190 and above 5 times with 200 and above 4 times. Lemieux had 190 and above once. Gretzky has 4 of the top 6 playoff seasons with Lemieux having 1. You posting that Gretzky has 4 of the top 6 ppg season actually reinforces my point of Lemieux reaching that level twice so not sure why that was posted.

Gretzky’s 51 game point streak was at a 3 ppg average (153 points) so leaving that out is important. The level at which he was playing at in 1984 was unmatched in league history. His peak season is above Mario’s especially in even games regular or adjusted. For example (60 games in 84 vs 60 games in 93 is clear as day). It just is what it is.

As for the 1996 season anyone who watched (and I did I was there for 11 games that year) can tell you that Mario was not at the 89 or 93 level. Clear difference. Nobody seriously believes 96 Lemieux is Mario’s best season let alone of all time and for good reason. Lemieux got the vast majority of his points in the first 48 team games that year when they gave out Powerplays like candy and the penguins were also scoring 5 goals per game. That was the most favorable environment of Lemieux’s career to rack up points in surrounded by a peak Jagr and Francis on that powerplay. No coincidence that after they stopped calling them and the league was starting to level out to 1997 level he had “only” 1.79 ppg in his final 29 games. He was also outdone that year at even strength points per game by Jagr (and nearly matched by Lindros) and for even strength point totals trailed Jagr, Lindros and fellow teammate (and non HOF player) Petr Nedved. Also he sat back to backs that year and had he played the more difficult games he sat we’d be looking at 175 ish points. People have hashed that out on here before.

For “adjusted stats” you are referencing hockey reference which was actually an extension of a baseball site who slapped together adjusted stats that the vast majority on here dismiss because they yield hideous results. So if you want to go with that then that’s your prerogative. That’s why posters better than I have made other adjustment methods that I’ve adopted that actually account for significantly more (vsx and EVG/PPG/SHG adjustments). By those metrics 1996 Lemieux is a great season but not close to the best ever. As for it being better than any of McDavid’s that’s not true to at least a portion of people that watched. 89 and 93 Lemieux are better but not 96. I saw 96 Lemieux, 21 and 23 McDavid and I take the McDavid years. Dominance over peers is similar, when adjusted to 2021 (EVG/PPG/SHG) Lemieux’s ppg becomes 1.90 virtually identical to McDavid with significantly more offensive support.

Start a poll. 96 lemieux vs mcdavid.

 

[WalterLundy]

Start a poll. 96 lemieux vs mcdavid.

23 or 21? Or both options?

I’ll do it but my point was that 82-87 Gretzky, 89 and 93 Lemieux would all win over 96 Lemieux not that 96 wasn’t great.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

23 or 21? Or both options?

I’ll do it but my point was that 82-87 Gretzky, 89 and 93 Lemieux would all win over 96 Lemieux not that 96 wasn’t great.

96 is in line with Gretzkys big years. Just as good. 161 points in 70 games is insane in a 6.29 gpg league

 

[DFC]

3rd best forward ever

Probably the thing that's most clear at this point, yeah.

 

[WalterLundy]

96 is in line with Gretzkys big years. Just as good. 161 points in 70 games is insane in a 6.29 gpg league

Then you are saying it is as good or better than Lemieux 89 or 93 as well which is also false. Polls would be closed for lopsided results if you put 96 Lemieux up against any of those. McDavid 21 and 23 would be closer. I feel 60% of the vote would go Mario but we can find out. Let me know which ones you want.

 

[plusandminus]

I personally think Hasek is probably the player who might currently be closest to number 5. (I know many rate him far lower, so do not be rude. I mention him since it can be easy to forget him. And I know many does not even rate him as the best goalie all-time.)

Regarding McDavid... Can someone help me understand the following. "Everyone" talks about him as being the clearly best player right now. He did win Conn Smythe. But he did not win Lindsay, Hart or a place on the AST1. If basically everyone seem to rate him as the best player, then why didn't he win those votings? What am I missing? Is he considered having had a quite poor season according to his usual standards? Maybe injuries early in the season prevented him from showing his usual standard, and this is weighted into the voting? (Just answer politely.)

This season, three players were very close to each other in the regular season individual point scoring race. (...which I think gets a little too much focus) They also had similar points per game stats. Normally, that would indicate that none of them are really super outstanding, for example like Gretzky and Lemieux was or Orr among defencemen. There were also fairly many 100 point scorers, where top-6 played for 6 different teams (as opposed to BOS 1970-71 or Gretzky EDM). What are your thoughts on that?

 

[bobholly39]

96 is in line with Gretzkys big years. Just as good. 161 points in 70 games is insane in a 6.29 gpg league

I don't think it is

League wide gpg is overrated.

96 Lemieux isn't as good as Gretzky's very best seasons or Lemieuxs own best seasons. Close, but slightly behind. It's probably still better than peak McDavid, but it's getting close

 

[bobholly39]

I personally think Hasek is probably the player who might currently be closest to number 5. (I know many rate him far lower, so do not be rude. I mention him since it can be easy to forget him. And I know many does not even rate him as the best goalie all-time.)

Regarding McDavid... Can someone help me understand the following. "Everyone" talks about him as being the clearly best player right now. He did win Conn Smythe. But he did not win Lindsay, Hart or a place on the AST1. If basically everyone seem to rate him as the best player, then why didn't he win those votings? What am I missing? Is he considered having had a quite poor season according to his usual standards? Maybe injuries early in the season prevented him from showing his usual standard, and this is weighted into the voting? (Just answer politely.)

This season, three players were very close to each other in the regular season individual point scoring race. (...which I think gets a little too much focus) They also had similar points per game stats. Normally, that would indicate that none of them are really super outstanding, for example like Gretzky and Lemieux was or Orr among defencemen. There were also fairly many 100 point scorers, where top-6 played for 6 different teams (as opposed to BOS 1970-71 or Gretzky EDM). What are your thoughts on that?

1. McDavid was injured early on and it definitely affected his season, yes. If you read end season injury reports, it seems like it may have affected him all season.

2. Even if he hadn't been injured - McDavid can't be expected to win the hart/lindsay/ross every single season. Nobody did that except for Gretzky and Lemieux (and Orr, but defense equivalent). Hasek didn't, Crosby didn't, Jagr didn't. McDavid is probably closest to winning every year

 

[authentic]

I don't think it is

League wide gpg is overrated.

96 Lemieux isn't as good as Gretzky's very best seasons or Lemieuxs own best seasons. Close, but slightly behind. It's probably still better than peak McDavid, but it's getting close

Competition at the top was also better then and in a league with more talent and parity. Still not as good as Gretzky’s best seasons though

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Then you are saying it is as good or better than Lemieux 89 or 93 as well which is also false. Polls would be closed for lopsided results if you put 96 Lemieux up against any of those. McDavid 21 and 23 would be closer. I feel 60% of the vote would go Mario but we can find out. Let me know which ones you want.

Lemieux was 40 points clear of any non penguin and with 12 games less. Was pacing for 69 more points than any non teamate. Ots his third best season easily

 

[WalterLundy]

Lemieux was 40 points clear of any non penguin and with 12 games less. Was pacing for 69 more points than any non teamate. Ots his third best season easily

It definitely is his third best season. I don’t disagree there. 89 and 93 Lemieux are clearly superior though as you’ll find it’s nearly consensus with that on this site. Same with the peak Gretzky years.

However this non teammate lead he had that you pace out (189 to 120) over 82 games is a margin of 57% better. If you look at McDavid in 2021 with his closest non teammate we are looking at 52% better. When you combine that with era adjustment in 2021 having Lemieux at 1.90 and McDavid still at 1.88 it gets a bit tight. Combine that with Lemieux having far more support offensively with him and it’s a legit debate for either peak McDavid year against this 96 Lemieux year. Nobody is debating 89 or 93 though. As someone who did get to see both trust me 96 Lemieux vs peak McDavid is close and given how Lemieux had lost a step visually compared to all McDavid could do either year I lean him. I easily see the other view as well.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

It definitely is his third best season. I don’t disagree there. 89 and 93 Lemieux are clearly superior though as you’ll find it’s nearly consensus with that on this site. Same with the peak Gretzky years.

However this non teammate lead he had that you pace out (189 to 120) over 82 games is a margin of 57% better. If you look at McDavid in 2021 with his closest non teammate we are looking at 52% better. When you combine that with era adjustment in 2021 having Lemieux at 1.90 and McDavid still at 1.88 it gets a bit tight. Combine that with Lemieux having far more support offensively with him and it’s a legit debate for either peak McDavid year against this 96 Lemieux year. Nobody is debating 89 or 93 though. As someone who did get to see both trust me 96 Lemieux vs peak McDavid is close and given how Lemieux had lost a step visually compared to all McDavid could do either year I lean him. I easily see the other view as well.

Difference is in 21 he didnt play in the nhl. He played in a 7 team canadian league. Use 2023

 

[WalterLundy]

Difference is in 21 he didnt play in the nhl. He played in a 7 team canadian league. Use 2023

You can use the north division numbers and they are still virtually the same. 2023 when I make the poll I’ll use. You got it.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

You can use the north division numbers and they are still virtually the same. 2023 when I make the poll I’ll use. You got it.

Make the poll if youd like. Dont feel forced too. But yeah lets see how it goes

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I don't think it is

League wide gpg is overrated.

96 Lemieux isn't as good as Gretzky's very best seasons or Lemieuxs own best seasons. Close, but slightly behind. It's probably still better than peak McDavid, but it's getting close

Lemieux's 1996 season is incredible, of course. But I don't find it quite as impressive as I once did. See this post. Lemieux was able to sit out of most back to back games (and his production, not surprisingly, was lower during games on consecutive days). He "only" missed 12 games, but almost all of them were games that he chose to miss, in order to have less wear and tear. His pace would have slowed down had he played all 82 games. (It still would have been really good, of course, but there's no way he would have approach 190 points, which is what he was "on pace" to do).

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lemieux's 1996 season is incredible, of course. But I don't find it quite as impressive as I once did. See this post. Lemieux was able to sit out of most back to back games (and his production, not surprisingly, was lower during games on consecutive days). He "only" missed 12 games, but almost all of them were games that he chose to miss, in order to have less wear and tear. His pace would have slowed down had he played all 82 games. (It still would have been really good, of course, but there's no way he would have approach 190 points, which is what he was "on pace" to do).

There is a false idea that mario skipped all the b2b games. I remember a few years ago i made a post on it. He did indeed play quite a few b2b games.. That idea is also grossly overstated

 

[Regal]

There is a false idea that mario skipped all the b2b games. I remember a few years ago i made a post on it. He did indeed play quite a few b2b games.. That idea is also grossly overstated

Good catch. That does get repeated a lot but a quick check says he played in 5 of 9 B2Bs unless I’m missing some

Edit: I don’t know where my head was at but I missed a lot

 

[Hockey Outsider]

There is a false idea that mario skipped all the b2b games. I remember a few years ago i made a post on it. He did indeed play quite a few b2b games.. That idea is also grossly overstated

It's true (I linked the wrong post before - see this one)

In 1996, out of the 12 games Lemieux missed, ten of them were back to back's (eight of those were the 2nd game, two of those were the 1st game). 83% of the games he missed were back to back's, but only 21% of the Pens' games were B2B. It was definitely workload management. (Not to mention - 11 of the 12 games he missed were on the road).

And, I showed in that post, his scoring pace was about 50 points lower (per 82 games) in the small number of back to back games that he actually played. Granted, it's a small sample size, but it suggests that Lemieux's pace benefitted from skipping so many B2B games.

It was still a great season - but I prefer 1988 (which works out to a slightly lower pace adjusted for the scoring environment, but he had a weaker supporting cast, and didn't selectively skip games).