Any option not involving a cup is a lateral move at best. Option 4 nobody but stats nerds will remember in a couple of years, but cup win(s) last generations.
Option 6 or 7 is a tossup to me. I went with 6 cause even with him underperforming in the playoffs in 6, at least he played all of them, don't feel like the final three games can overcome that, even with the result (20-25 playoff games played vs 3)
It's almost like 75% of hockey fans (current sum of options 6 and 7) understand that winning a Cup is an accomplishment that matters. Who would've thought?
For perspective, Auston Matthews just scored 69 goals this past year with ridiculous possession numbers, resulting in his being a Selke nominee for the first time ever (well deserved). He's led the league in goals 3 of the last 4 reg seasons and his 69 goals are the most in the NHL since Lemieux 30 years ago. And no one cares.
Same with McDavid's regular season accomplishments, especially when considering them in the context of his legacy. He needs to win a cup.
playing half a season isn’t legendary at all for me, maybe it is for you.Not true! Crosby's 2010-11 is legendary around here and is discussed way more than any of his cup wins or Art Ross wins. A magical "what if half season" could do wonders for McDavid's legacy!
The average fans are out of touch jobbers! Their opinions mean nothing! Ask your average hockey fan in Florida or California about Bobby Orr or Phil Esposito and they'll have no idea who you're talking about. The stat watchers on the other hand are much more knowledgeable when it comes to hockey and it's vast history!Everyone here is a stats nerd to some extent, certainly more invested than the average fan, and the average fan is what a player's legacy is built upon.
Yeah, try telling that to daver and wetcoast!playing half a season isn’t legendary at all for me, maybe it is for you.
People definitely care. He's close to a Top 100 player all-time despite lackluster playoff results.
As a Leafs fan, I'd definitely like to see more from him in the playoffs.
Obviously playoff results matter, but for a player of McDavid's stature, there's nothing special about winning a Stanley Cup as the third most important contributor or sitting out the majority of the playoffs and getting your name on the Cup. A 169 point season is a far greater accomplishment.
What a strange take. Winning a Stanley Cup absolutely is special. This is not a controversial opinion and is also borne out by the responses in this poll and practically every player interview ever.
Do you think Auston Matthews would've traded 20 of those regular season goals for a chance for the Leafs to play in the SCF? Of course he would, and I'm sure the entire Leafs fandom would've as well.
Also speaking of contributions, despite winning the Conn Smythe I'd argue Ovechkin won the cup as probably the 2nd or 3rd most important contributor that year (Kuznetsov, Holtby). The only thing people care about is that he finally got through Pittsburgh and won, while scoring a few clutch goals along the way. Who cares if he ended up with an impressive but not dominant 27 points in 24 games (I had to look that up just now, that's how memorable the overall statline was).
***
Anyway imo McDavid has nothing more to prove in the regular season or in regards to his overall offensive talent -- I think he would also agree that scoring 169 points would be impressive but not nearly as impressive as a parade.
Ahh just like Crosby in 16/17,Also speaking of contributions, despite winning the Conn Smythe I'd argue Ovechkin won the cup as probably the 2nd or 3rd most important contributor that year (Kuznetsov, Holtby).
Ahh just like Crosby in 16/17,Who cares if he ended up with an impressive but not dominant 27 points in 24 games
The average fans are out of touch jobbers! Their opinions mean nothing! Ask your average hockey fan in Florida or California about Bobby Orr or Phil Esposito and they'll have no idea who you're talking about. The stat watchers on the other hand are much more knowledgeable when it comes to hockey and it's vast history!
Yeah, try telling that to daver and wetcoast!
Do you think Ovechkin played at a higher level in 2009 or 2018? Obviously 2009.
He had a very good playoff run in 2018 and had a good team around him as well. He didn't win that year because he played his best hockey. He won because he played well and so did others around him. The Cup is a team award. As a hockey fan, you want to see your team win. McDavid would have won the Cup this year if Draisaitl had played better than he did. He probably will win the Cup if Draisaitl outplays him in the future - why should players be judged based on what their teammates do?
I'm talking about legacy (ie the topic of this thread).
Ovi's cup win, combined with all the goals he scored and multiple Hart wins, means Ovi's legacy is secure. If Ovi only scored 36 goals in 2009 instead of 56 goals (everything else the same), he probably wins one fewer Hart over the course of his career, boo hoo. Looking back, his legacy would still essentially be exactly the same.
If the Caps don't win the cup at all, Ovi's legacy is much more uncertain, and he goes down as one of the best (if not the best) player to have never won the cup. His entire legacy is different without that cup win. Maybe he even pulls a Ray Bourque and gets traded to Colorado wouldn't that have been something.
***
You're making a weird argument man. Winning games is clearly important and is winning championships is a vital part of a career resume. If McDavid never wins a cup, he'd likely become the best player to have never won a cup. That's what his legacy would be, it's not a legacy that anybody would want to have.
It'd be far better for his legacy if he were to win a cup with an Edmonton team that's actually pretty good (compared to the effect of putting up another dominant regular season). No brainer in my opinion (as well as ~75% of the people who voted in this poll).
The poll is specifically for the 2024-2025 season, though. If he doesn't win next year, that doesn't mean he can't ever win. But next season may be one of the last seasons of his offensive prime. Personally, I think it would do more for his legacy to put up a near 170 point season and have a very strong showing in the playoffs (two points per game) than to be carried to a Cup win by Draisaitl or miss most of the playoffs and have the missing Cup part of his legacy sewn up.
This wouldn't be like when Ovechkin or Crosby (2016 or 2017) won the Cup, either. You can dispute if they were the rightful Smythe winners, but they were right there with their higher scoring teammates in points and importance. If Drai outscores the guy by 18 points in the playoffs, he'll literally be carrying him to a Stanley Cup. I think McDavid is good enough that he can win a Cup at some point without being carried to that extent.
I voted for option 7 and do think a cup is the missing piece in his legacy, but I don't agree with the bolded. Championships obviously are very important (and McDavid would prefer options 6/7 over the others), but option 4 is a level of dominance you're lucky to see as a fan once in 2 or 3 generations; people would talk about that for a very long time. It's the same reason casual fans remember Giguere's 03 smythe before his 07 cup (also why people bring up Richard's 50 in 50, Gretzky's 50 in 39/92 in 82 before bringing up their cups). The cup obviously cements your legacy, but most fans don't really talk about players' championship runs unless it's extremely dominant like Roy/Lemieux/Gretzky/etc. or in an exceptionally memorable narrative like Bourque/Yzerman. Option 7 would arguably be just as memorable of a story, but people would forget about option 6 pretty quickly.Any option not involving a cup is a lateral move at best. Option 4 nobody but stats nerds will remember in a couple of years, but cup win(s) last generations.
Option 6 or 7 is a tossup to me. I went with 6 cause even with him underperforming in the playoffs in 6, at least he played all of them, don't feel like the final three games can overcome that, even with the result (20-25 playoff games played vs 3)
It does get very annoying and I personally haven’t seen anything like it in hockey. It all comes down to gatekeeping I think and trying to fend off the inevitable. That being a 2-4 range all time career. That’s my suspicion at least. It’s easier just to sit back and enjoy watching history here.Who are some of you kidding?
He could go out and drop 164 points (2.00 PPG), win a fourth Hart, fifth Lindsay, and sixth Art Ross, win the Cup, and collect his second Conn Smythe, and some will still say: “Yeah, but can he do it again? It’s a fluke unless he does it again.”
Never have I’ve seen a hockey player need to do more to be considered greater than others who have done far less.
It does get very annoying and I personally haven’t seen anything like it in hockey. It all comes down to gatekeeping I think and trying to fend off the inevitable. That being a 2-4 range all time career. That’s my suspicion at least. It’s easier just to sit back and enjoy watching history here.
As for the what if stuff I think there should be a movement to counter the pace arguments not just for McDavid’s sake but in general. Take a season like 2021-22 McDavid and stop it right at his first 22 games and pretend he got hurt or something. Same amount as Crosby 2012 only they were played consecutively here. He had 42 points and 16 goals in those 22 games so you can just pace that out to 82 games for 60 goals and 157 points. Instead of winning the Ross with the actual 123 points he now gets his 157 point season that he didn’t earn but now wins the Ross by 42 points. So now it is more dominant of an art Ross win than anything outside of 82-87 Gretzky.
Just an idea and it shows how silly it all really is. You can do the same with Gretzky’s first 51 games (153 points) of the 1983-84 season before the shoulder injury “derailed” (by his standards) his pace. We can stop that there and give him the 96 goal, 144 assist, 240 point 80 game pace he was on as his new all time record. I’ve thought about this for awhile since in these cases they actually still go on to win the Ross so why not use it to combat the lunacy?