Which of the following scenarios would be best for Crosby’s career in 2024-25?

[Goptor]

Option 1 would be the best since it would make Dubas the greatest GM in the business.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Remove any top players’ seasons at age 20, 23, 24 and 25 and let me know how their top seasons look like. Here’s what Ovechkin’s and McDavid’s resume would look like if they lost as many games during those seasons (first 9 years)

Ovechkin
- One single 100 point season in 2008 (112)
- 1 Ross
- 2 Hart
- 1 Lindsey

McDavid
- Five 100 point seasons (He probably gets 100 points in age-25 season with 75% of GP and gets it in 2020 too)
- 1 Ross
- 1 Hart
- 2 Lindsey (He probably would have won the Lindsey if he played 75% of the games in 2023)

Compare that to Crosby:
- Five 100 point seasons
- 2 Ross
- 2 Hart
- 3 Lindsey

Not too sure why some posters seem to be wondering why Crosby’s peak seasons are not as impressive as they should, when it’s clearly due to injuries.

 

[Video Nasty]

Remove any top players’ seasons at age 20, 23, 24 and 25 and let me know how their top seasons look like.

McDavid is 153, 132, 116, with likely a couple higher totals than 116 and 132 to come.

For the three players who won the Art Ross from 1979-1980 through 2000-2001, Gretzky was 212, 196, 183. Lemieux was 168, 161, 160. Jagr was 127, 123, 121.

They weren't one and done 110+ players, when you remove their age 20, 23-25 years.

For fun, another five time Art Ross winner, Esposito had 6 seasons between 126-152 points between the ages of 26-32. Excluding the scoring bump during his age 40 season, even Howe posted the 86 had had twice during his age 23-25 years, when he had 86 at age 28 and 89 at age 34.

 

[Xspyrit]

They're not? I think they are. Why don't you start a separate poll to find out.

There was a poll for that already. Didn't check the results but anyone who knows a little bit about hockey answered yes to that question if McDavid is in another tier. I assume it was the vast majority in a landslide

The guys already cemented himself as the best since Lemieux, I don’t think he really needs to do much next season

Wrong thread?

 

[uncleben]

Option 1 for sure
Another Cup and Conn Smythe put him in god-tier

But I love adding another Rocket this late in his career and expanding his cabinet with a Selke.

---

In terms of expanding his cabinet, does this touch the other options?


Crosby plays a near perfect season, matching his career high 120 pts and achieving a career low single-digit PIM, securing the Lady Byng. A full career of consistency and 120 points breaking the record for a 35+ y/o season, he wins the Masterton; and his work off the ice gets him the Clancy.
He leads the Pens to the Conference Final, finishing a PPG in playoffs, but not before captaining Canada to a 4 Nations Cup win as MVP.

 

[Acallabeth]

Remove any top players’ seasons at age 20, 23, 24 and 25 and let me know how their top seasons look like.

And why would we do that?
Remove all seasons with more assist than points and let's compare who has had a better career.

 

[WalterLundy]

Remove any top players’ seasons at age 20, 23, 24 and 25 and let me know how their top seasons look like. Here’s what Ovechkin’s and McDavid’s resume would look like if they lost as many games during those seasons (first 9 years)

Ovechkin
- One single 100 point season in 2008 (112)
- 1 Ross
- 2 Hart
- 1 Lindsey

McDavid
- Five 100 point seasons (He probably gets 100 points in age-25 season with 75% of GP and gets it in 2020 too)
- 1 Ross
- 1 Hart
- 2 Lindsey (He probably would have won the Lindsey if he played 75% of the games in 2023)

Compare that to Crosby:
- Five 100 point seasons
- 2 Ross
- 2 Hart
- 3 Lindsey

Not too sure why some posters seem to be wondering why Crosby’s peak seasons are not as impressive as they should, when it’s clearly due to injuries.

I don’t typically use the adjustments on hockey reference as I account for each scoring level by adjusting separately (Even strength, powerplay and shorthanded adjusted to the average in the NHL’s history). With that being said those numbers and the HockeyReference adjusted stats while different will each tell the same story here. For that I’ll just use those as more people will have less questions.

Hockey reference adjustments:

McDavid:
21: 82 GP: 158 P
23: 82 GP: 146 P
24: 76 GP: 130 P
Total: 240 GP: 434 P (1.81)

McDavid next 3 best seasons:
22: 80 GP: 118 P
19: 78 GP: 116 P
20: 74 GP: 113 P
Total: 232 GP: 347 P (1.50)

Crosby’s (what if) peak:
11: 41 GP: 71 P
12: 22 GP: 41 P
13: 36 GP: 62 P
Total: 99 GP: 174 P (1.76)
All games prorated: 246 GP: 436 P (1.77)

Crosby best full seasons:
07: 79 GP: 122 P
10: 81 GP: 117 P
14: 80 GP: 116 P
Total: 240 GP: 355 P (1.48)

Ovechkin:
08: 82 GP: 122 P
10: 72 GP: 117 P
09: 79 GP: 114 P
Total: 233 GP: 353 P (1.52)

Malkin:
12: 75 GP: 122 P
09: 82 GP: 117 P
08: 82 GP: 115 P
Total: 239 GP: 354 P (1.48)

Kucherov:
24: 81 GP: 140 P
19: 82 GP: 128 P
23: 82 GP: 108 P
Total: 245 GP: 376 P (1.53)

MacKinnon:
24: 82 GP: 138 P
23: 71 GP: 105 P
21: 70 GP: 98 P
Total: 223 GP: 341 P (1.53)

Draisaitl:
20: 82 GP: 128 P
21: 82 GP: 127 P
23: 80 GP: 122 P
Total: 244 GP: 377 P (1.55)

Kane:
16: 82 GP: 119 P
19: 81 GP: 111 P
13: 80 GP: 105 P
Total: 243 GP: 335 P (1.38)

You are right in saying that a big part of it is injuries as to why his absolute best seasons aren’t better than what they currently are. Crosby’s paces at his peak seasons wouldn’t have been 100% sustained as that never happens with any player with small sample sizes to full seasons. In 2007 he was on pace for 139 points after 56 games but finished with 120 for example. With that said it is reasonable to assume had he been healthy that his adjusted ppg for the range of 2011 would have been between 1.60 and 1.70 for sure. This is a fair assumption and places him above everyone post lockout comfortably and firmly in the two spot behind McDavid for peak. However if you do prorate his 2011-2013 numbers and generously give him that he still ends up being marginally worse than McDavid’s three best.

McDavid actually doing that while having seasons like 2019, 2020 and 2022 that when adjusted are still better collectively than Crosby’s best full seasons adjusted is what shows a big difference. A proven product that is even better than a maxed out peak Crosby hypothetical with generous pace and era adjustments. That is while still having his next best three seasons on par with every other post lockout elite peak as throw away seasons. With him being only 27 it is highly likely that there will be at least a few more seasons that will clear the 2019, 2020 and 2022 range and even displace one of the peak 3 seasons he’s had. The next closest 3 year peak adjusted ppg is his own teammate and over 82 games it is a 21 point gap. It shows the order of offensive supremacy beyond a shadow of a doubt. That is living up to generational offensive talent.

Now that the injured peak seasons have been addressed I think something else is nearly as important and needs considered. Crosby up to 2011 was producing wonderfully and then was robbed of his best seasons. That indeed is true and unfortunate. Crosby also had an opportunity from 2013-14 to 2016-17 to show that even while the DPE 2.0 was here, that he could put up 110 or more in a season. League GPG from 14-17 was at 2.74. Last year it was 3.11 so 110 as a base then would be worth roughly 125 points now. Not unreasonable of an expectation for a prime Sidney Crosby aged 26-29. If he puts up one or two seasons of say 110-115 and there would be virtually no doubts among any fan about his 2011-2013 being 120-130 each season and worth 140s in todays game. The issue is he topped out at 104 and didn’t prove that he was capable. He didn’t show us this specifically. Great leader, a guy you’d want to build around, fantastic person, great ambassador for the game, childhood hero for my kids, great player and 5th best all time career (5-7 range I’d say). The epitome of an offensive generational talent? Not quite.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I don’t typically use the adjustments on hockey reference as I account for each scoring level by adjusting separately (Even strength, powerplay and shorthanded adjusted to the average in the NHL’s history). With that being said those numbers and the HockeyReference adjusted stats while different will each tell the same story here. For that I’ll just use those as more people will have less questions.

Hockey reference adjustments:

McDavid:
21: 82 GP: 158 P
23: 82 GP: 146 P
24: 76 GP: 130 P
Total: 240 GP: 434 P (1.81)

McDavid next 3 best seasons:
22: 80 GP: 118 P
19: 78 GP: 116 P
20: 74 GP: 113 P
Total: 232 GP: 347 P (1.50)

Crosby’s (what if) peak:
11: 41 GP: 71 P
12: 22 GP: 41 P
13: 36 GP: 62 P
Total: 99 GP: 174 P (1.76)
All games prorated: 246 GP: 436 P (1.77)

Crosby best full seasons:
07: 79 GP: 122 P
10: 81 GP: 117 P
14: 80 GP: 116 P
Total: 240 GP: 355 P (1.48)

Ovechkin:
08: 82 GP: 122 P
10: 72 GP: 117 P
09: 79 GP: 114 P
Total: 233 GP: 353 P (1.52)

Malkin:
12: 75 GP: 122 P
09: 82 GP: 117 P
08: 82 GP: 115 P
Total: 239 GP: 354 P (1.48)

Kucherov:
24: 81 GP: 140 P
19: 82 GP: 128 P
23: 82 GP: 108 P
Total: 245 GP: 376 P (1.53)

MacKinnon:
24: 82 GP: 138 P
23: 71 GP: 105 P
21: 70 GP: 98 P
Total: 223 GP: 341 P (1.53)

Draisaitl:
20: 82 GP: 128 P
21: 82 GP: 127 P
23: 80 GP: 122 P
Total: 244 GP: 377 P (1.55)

Kane:
16: 82 GP: 119 P
19: 81 GP: 111 P
13: 80 GP: 105 P
Total: 243 GP: 335 P (1.38)

You are right in saying that a big part of it is injuries as to why his absolute best seasons aren’t better than what they currently are. Crosby’s paces at his peak seasons wouldn’t have been 100% sustained as that never happens with any player with small sample sizes to full seasons. In 2007 he was on pace for 139 points after 56 games but finished with 120 for example. With that said it is reasonable to assume had he been healthy that his adjusted ppg for the range of 2011 would have been between 1.60 and 1.70 for sure. This is a fair assumption and places him above everyone post lockout comfortably and firmly in the two spot behind McDavid for peak. However if you do prorate his 2011-2013 numbers and generously give him that he still ends up being marginally worse than McDavid’s three best.

McDavid actually doing that while having seasons like 2019, 2020 and 2022 that when adjusted are still better collectively than Crosby’s best full seasons adjusted is what shows a big difference. A proven product that is even better than a maxed out peak Crosby hypothetical with generous pace and era adjustments. That is while still having his next best three seasons on par with every other post lockout elite peak as throw away seasons. With him being only 27 it is highly likely that there will be at least a few more seasons that will clear the 2019, 2020 and 2022 range and even displace one of the peak 3 seasons he’s had. The next closest 3 year peak adjusted ppg is his own teammate and over 82 games it is a 21 point gap. It shows the order of offensive supremacy beyond a shadow of a doubt. That is living up to generational offensive talent.

Now that the injured peak seasons have been addressed I think something else is nearly as important and needs considered. Crosby up to 2011 was producing wonderfully and then was robbed of his best seasons. That indeed is true and unfortunate. Crosby also had an opportunity from 2013-14 to 2016-17 to show that even while the DPE 2.0 was here, that he could put up 110 or more in a season. League GPG from 14-17 was at 2.74. Last year it was 3.11 so 110 as a base then would be worth roughly 125 points now. Not unreasonable of an expectation for a prime Sidney Crosby aged 26-29. If he puts up one or two seasons of say 110-115 and there would be virtually no doubts among any fan about his 2011-2013 being 120-130 each season and worth 140s in todays game. The issue is he topped out at 104 and didn’t prove that he was capable. He didn’t show us this specifically. Great leader, a guy you’d want to build around, fantastic person, great ambassador for the game, childhood hero for my kids, great player and 5th best all time career (5-7 range I’d say). The epitome of an offensive generational talent? Not quite.

The adjusted stats method is far from a perfect way to compare different scoring environments, as higher scoring environments generally tend to favor the top players more than the depth players. Using the dominance vs peers is the best way to compare players in different scoring environments.

Here is what Crosby has done from 2014-2017 (age 26 to 29)

2014: Swept everything (besides the Rocket), 1st in points, 1st in PPG.

2015: 3rd in scoring, 1st in PPG.

2016: 3rd in scoring, 4th in PPG (0,23 behind Kane) after a catastrophic start to the season.

2017: 2nd in scoring, 2nd in PPG (0,03 behind McDavid), Rocket winner.

Combine all these years and compare the PPG of the top players during that period (>50% GP)

1) Crosby - 1,16
2) Kane - 1,12
3) Malkin - 1,10
4) Benn - 1,01
5) Seguin - 1,00
6) Backstrom - 0,98
7) Tavares - 0,97
8) Getzlaf - 0,96
9) Ovechkin - 0,94
10) Stamkos - 0,92

Crosby still leads, albeit not by much. Only 5 players played at a PPG pace during that timeframe.

Here is what McDavid has done is his age 26 season, which is the equivalent of Crosby’s 2014 season.

2024: 3rd in scoring, 2nd in PPG.

1) Kucherov - 1,78
2) McDavid - 1,74
3) MacKinnon - 1,71
4) Panarin - 1,46
5) Pastrnak - 1,34
6) Matthews - 1,32
7) Draisaitl - 1,31
8) Rantanen - 1,30
9) Kaprizov - 1,28
10) J.T. Miller - 1,27

It’s only one season and we’ll see how McDavid does in the next 3 seasons. There seems to be a big 3 of McDavid/Kucherov/MacKinnon separating themselves from the pack, just like Crosby/Kane/Malkin did from 2014 to 2017.

To conclude, it’s not unusual to see top players’ production/dominance dip after their age 25 season. Crosby was still the best from age 26 to age 29, before he handed the mantle to McDavid in 2017-2018. We’ll see if a similar thing happens with McDavid, having a potential superstar like Bedard who’s coming up.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The adjusted stats method is far from a perfect way to compare different scoring environments, as higher scoring environments generally tend to favor the top players more than the depth players. Using the dominance vs peers is the best way to compare players in different scoring environments.

It’s better than pace.
There are no pace trophies, pace is used by people trying to prop up their guys, because they were injured.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

It’s better than pace.
There are no pace trophies, pace is used by people trying to prop up their guys, because they were injured.

Pace is used as contextual evidence to refute the claims that are suggesting Crosby wasn’t “that” dominant, especially when you simply look at his full healthy seasons.

The truth is that every single player’s resume in history would suffer immensely if they missed the same amount of games as Crosby in their age 20, 23, 24 and 25 seasons, due to freak injuries, for the most part. There will also be some disingenuous people who will point out to a lack of durability, as the primary cause of the missed games, even though the player in question will probably end his career in the top 30 of the most games played in NHL history, while averaging 79 GP in the 13 other seasons he’s played (15 minus the 2 COVID shortened seasons).

 

[WalterLundy]

The adjusted stats method is far from a perfect way to compare different scoring environments, as higher scoring environments generally tend to favor the top players more than the depth players. Using the dominance vs peers is the best way to compare players in different scoring environments.

Here is what Crosby has done from 2014-2017 (age 26 to 29)

2014: Swept everything (besides the Rocket), 1st in points, 1st in PPG.

2015: 3rd in scoring, 1st in PPG.

2016: 3rd in scoring, 4th in PPG (0,23 behind Kane) after a catastrophic start to the season.

2017: 2nd in scoring, 2nd in PPG (0,03 behind McDavid), Rocket winner.

Combine all these years and compare the PPG of the top players during that period (>50% GP)

1) Crosby - 1,16
2) Kane - 1,12
3) Malkin - 1,10
4) Benn - 1,01
5) Seguin - 1,00
6) Backstrom - 0,98
7) Tavares - 0,97
8) Getzlaf - 0,96
9) Ovechkin - 0,94
10) Stamkos - 0,92

Crosby still leads, albeit not by much. Only 5 players played at a PPG pace during that timeframe.

Here is what McDavid has done is his age 26 season, which is the equivalent of Crosby’s 2014 season.

2024: 3rd in scoring, 2nd in PPG.

1) Kucherov - 1,78
2) McDavid - 1,74
3) MacKinnon - 1,71
4) Panarin - 1,46
5) Pastrnak - 1,34
6) Matthews - 1,32
7) Draisaitl - 1,31
8) Rantanen - 1,30
9) Kaprizov - 1,28
10) J.T. Miller - 1,27

It’s only one season and we’ll see how McDavid does in the next 3 seasons. There seems to be a big 3 of McDavid/Kucherov/MacKinnon separating themselves from the pack, just like Crosby/Kane/Malkin did from 2014 to 2017.

To conclude, it’s not unusual to see top players’ production/dominance dip after their age 25 season. Crosby was still the best from age 26 to age 29, before he handed the mantle to McDavid in 2017-2018. We’ll see if a similar thing happens with McDavid, having a potential superstar like Bedard who’s coming up.

I see how you approach it and I honestly don’t mind people approaching it differently. Was a pretty solid response and shows there is much to consider. What I’d say is that when looking at competition from 2024 and comparing it to the 2014-2017 there is absolutely zero comparison and that matters. If you look at the adjusted stats just for this you’ll see that it has to tell something important to us. Sure McDavid finished 3rd in points but he missed time and played injured. From November 24th onward (when he was able to play like himself again despite injury) he had 158 points in his next 85 games including the playoffs. That’s the same level of production we saw in 2022-23 and did it while playing hurt.

Beyond that the two leaders this season when adjusted had 140 and 138 point seasons. The last time we saw someone put up anything like that (other than McDavid 2023 and 2021) was in 1999 with Jaromír Jagr. In 2015 for Crosby’s age 27 season the leader was Benn with 97 adjusted points. An injured 27 year old McDavid had 130 adjusted points in 76 games last year. In theory he’d have won that Ross against that level of paltry 2015 competition by a remarkable margin. Whether you like adjusted stats or not I think it’s obvious that the level of competition matters, that adjusted stats can somewhat gauge that and that it is inarguably higher now than then.

As for the emerging big 3 I think it’s been established now for some time. Since 2021 ppg leaders have been McDavid at 1.74, Kucherov at 1.55 and MacKinnon at 1.52. Last year you had two players have absolute peak seasons far above normal levels where the other had his third best of his career (would be insane for anyone else but has shown twice a higher level). It can also be argued that McDavid was the best player as early as 2016-17 as well since he did win the Hart and Art Ross. He also was 3rd in points per game in 2015-16 as a rookie albeit in an injury shortened season for him but nobody is arguing he was the best there yet with a peak Kane year happening simultaneously.

 

[dr robbie]

I would take any one of these options and run with it.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

Inspired by the Mulletman,

this is as far as I got

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I see how you approach it and I honestly don’t mind people approaching it differently. Was a pretty solid response and shows there is much to consider. What I’d say is that when looking at competition from 2024 and comparing it to the 2014-2017 there is absolutely zero comparison and that matters. If you look at the adjusted stats just for this you’ll see that it has to tell something important to us. Sure McDavid finished 3rd in points but he missed time and played injured. From November 24th onward (when he was able to play like himself again despite injury) he had 158 points in his next 85 games including the playoffs. That’s the same level of production we saw in 2022-23 and did it while playing hurt.

Beyond that the two leaders this season when adjusted had 140 and 138 point seasons. The last time we saw someone put up anything like that (other than McDavid 2023 and 2021) was in 1999 with Jaromír Jagr. In 2015 for Crosby’s age 27 season the leader was Benn with 97 adjusted points. An injured 27 year old McDavid had 130 adjusted points in 76 games last year. In theory he’d have won that Ross against that level of paltry 2015 competition by a remarkable margin. Whether you like adjusted stats or not I think it’s obvious that the level of competition matters, that adjusted stats can somewhat gauge that and that it is inarguably higher now than then.

As for the emerging big 3 I think it’s been established now for some time. Since 2021 ppg leaders have been McDavid at 1.74, Kucherov at 1.55 and MacKinnon at 1.52. Last year you had two players have absolute peak seasons far above normal levels where the other had his third best of his career (would be insane for anyone else but has shown twice a higher level). It can also be argued that McDavid was the best player as early as 2016-17 as well since he did win the Hart and Art Ross. He also was 3rd in points per game in 2015-16 as a rookie albeit in an injury shortened season for him but nobody is arguing he was the best there yet with a peak Kane year happening simultaneously.

Adjusted stats really don’t move me, like, at all. It’s a broken concept that doesn’t take into account the different way the game was played. Today’s game favours speed and skill, which is a perfect environment for players like McDavid to succeed. You can’t just take the stats McDavid is compiling in that style of play and expect him to do the same in a much more tight checking game, which was how the game was played in the early 2010s.

There’s a reason why basically every single top player of the 2020s started having breakout seasons around 2018 and 2019.

- MacKinnon had his breakout season in 2017-2018 (age 22) and has only gotten better since then. He was not even close to a PPG player the season before (age 21).

- Kucherov had his first 100 point season in 2017-2018 and a whopping 128 pts, out of nowhere, in 2018-2019. He was far from being a PPG player in 2015-2016 (age 22)

- Draisaitl had a breakout season in 2018-2019, with 50 goals and 105 points (age 22). His previous high was 77 points.

- Marner had his breakout season in 2018-2019, scoring 94 points (age 21), which was 25 more points than his previous highest total.

- Pastrnak started being a PPG player in 2018-2019, playing at a 100 point pace (81 in 66), after his highest total before that season was 80 pts in 82 GP (0,98).

- Panarin started being a PPG player in 2018 when he joined Columbus and started pacing for 90 pts in 2019 (age 28), something he could not do even when glued to peak Patrick Kane, the seasons prior.

- Matthew Tkachuk had a career high of 49 points before 2018-2019, and he started playing close to a PPG in 2018-2019 (77 in 80 GP)

- Gaudreau scored 99 points (age 26) in 2018-2019, his previous high was 84.

- Steven Stamkos, who had 72 pts and 64 pts in his last 2 healthy seasons up until 2017-2018, scored 86 pts, something he had not done since he was 21, followed it by scoring 98! in 2018-2019, at 28 years old

- Both Huberdeau and Barkov miraculously became PPG players in 2019, scoring over 90 pts, when none of them had even cracked 60 before 2018.

- Patrick Kane, had a career year in points with 110 at age 29, in 2019, even though he had broken the 90 points mark only once in his career before that.

- Even Ovechkin started scoring 50 again and had 89 points in 2019, which was the highest total he put up since 2010.

It’s obvious to anybody that the star players benefited A LOT from the change in scoring environnement. Almost every young player received a big jump in production around 2018, which was the time when the goalie pads got reduced and coincided with the change to a more fast paced league. There’s no adjustment that can quantify those effects, why is why the dominance vs peers is the primary method that should be used to compare players who played in different scoring environments.

Unless you think that all of McDavid, Kucherov, MacKinnon and Draisaitl have somehow all had better seasons than any of Malkin, Crosby, Ovechkin or Kane, it’s time to put this argument to rest.

 

[WalterLundy]

Adjusted stats really don’t move me, like, at all. It’s a broken concept that doesn’t take into account the different way the game was played. Today’s game favours speed and skill, which is a perfect environment for players like McDavid to succeed. You can’t just take the stats McDavid is compiling in that style of play and expect him to do the same in a much more tight checking game, which was how the game was played in the early 2010s.

There’s a reason why basically every single top player of the 2020s started having breakout seasons around 2018 and 2019.

- MacKinnon had his breakout season in 2017-2018 (age 22) and has only gotten better since then. He was not even close to a PPG player the season before (age 21).

- Kucherov had his first 100 point season in 2017-2018 and a whopping 128 pts, out of nowhere, in 2018-2019. He was far from being a PPG player in 2015-2016 (age 22)

- Draisaitl had a breakout season in 2018-2019, with 50 goals and 105 points (age 22). His previous high was 77 points.

- Marner had his breakout season in 2018-2019, scoring 94 points (age 21), which was 25 more points than his previous highest total.

- Pastrnak started being a PPG player in 2018-2019, playing at a 100 point pace (81 in 66), after his highest total before that season was 80 pts in 82 GP (0,98).

- Panarin started being a PPG player in 2018 when he joined Columbus and started pacing for 90 pts in 2019 (age 28), something he could not do even when glued to peak Patrick Kane, the seasons prior.

- Matthew Tkachuk had a career high of 49 points before 2018-2019, and he started playing close to a PPG in 2018-2019 (77 in 80 GP)

- Gaudreau scored 99 points (age 26) in 2018-2019, his previous high was 84.

- Steven Stamkos, who had 72 pts and 64 pts in his last 2 healthy seasons up until 2017-2018, scored 86 pts, something he had not done since he was 21, followed it by scoring 98! in 2018-2019, at 28 years old

- Both Huberdeau and Barkov miraculously became PPG players in 2019, scoring over 90 pts, when none of them had even cracked 60 before 2018.

- Patrick Kane, had a career year in points with 110 at age 29, in 2019, even though he had broken the 90 points mark only once in his career before that.

- Even Ovechkin started scoring 50 again and had 89 points in 2019, which was the highest total he put up since 2010.

It’s obvious to anybody that the star players benefited A LOT from the change in scoring environnement. Almost every young player received a big jump in production around 2018, which was the time when the goalie pads got reduced and coincided with the change to a more fast paced league. There’s no adjustment that can quantify those effects, why is why the dominance vs peers is the primary method that should be used to compare players who played in different scoring environments.

Unless you think that all of McDavid, Kucherov, MacKinnon and Draisaitl have somehow all had better seasons than any of Malkin, Crosby, Ovechkin or Kane, it’s time to put this argument to rest.

Nobody is debating scoring being up and I know why it’s gone up although I do applaud the amount of info you packed into that post. It’s the reason for a lot of things. Crosby’s ppg streak would have died out by now if scoring didn’t go up. McDavid wouldn’t have scored 150+ points if it occurred in the 2011-2017 range. That 153 also wouldn’t have been 110 than either more like 130-140.

McDavid played the first two seasons of his career in this low scoring environment where the superstars of a decade ago were still in prime form. From 2015-16 to 2016-17 here are the top 5 in ppg:

Kane: 1.19
McDavid: 1.17
Crosby: 1.12
Malkin: 1.09
Kucherov: 1.00

McDavid was right there with the best per game producer in the league in the tail end of DPE 2.0 as a 19-20 year old. He (and to a slightly lesser extent Kucherov) are right there with the three best point getters of those years who are in their prime and they did this before theirs really started. I’m not saying adjustments are perfect but it’s obvious that a 24-27 year old McDavid shreds this period like a head of cabbage as well if he’s arguably the best as a rookie/sophomore back then as is. What he’d actually put up is unknown but there is no reason to believe it wouldn’t be by far the highest totals of the period.

On the other hand we have no reason to believe that any of the Crosby, Malkin, Kane and Ovechkin crop would put up 140 and above in todays scoring environment. McDavid (especially him), Kucherov and MacKinnon have had better seasons than that group of players. Regular and when adjusted in some way. To me that does matter but since I know now how you view it I get why it doesn’t move the needle for you. Goals per game from 18-24 are at 3.02 and from 11-17 were at 2.68. That is a big difference as I’ve admitted scoring is for sure up. This increase however does not turn a 100-110 player into a 140-150 player. It moves that 100-110 guy into a 113 to 124 guy. Only Crosby’s shortened seasons would be boosted to 140 point paces and those are just that.

Overall the argument boils down to sticking to comparing peers vs peers. That is fine and I respect/understand it but you have to realize that it isn’t the only way to do this sort of thing and not without it’s flaws either. I feel the same way about that as you do with adjustments as I feel that the quality of peers being dominated fluctuates and not everything is equal.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Option 1 is the easy choice due to the Smythe.

Option 2 is next. Winning a Hart at 37 would be absurd. It'd make him:

2 years older than the current oldest winners(Shore and Gardiner, both preWWII).
3 years older than Howe's last win.
8 years older than Gretzky's last win.
8 years older than Sedin as the oldest player to win in the cap era.

While a Selke/Rocket season is also crazy and historic, I think a Hart is more impressive considering the competition.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Still find it laughable people think crosby couldnt have scred 130 in 2011-2013. He scored 120 in 79 which is 125 in 82 a couple years earlier. In 2011 he was finally recovered from his ankle sprain and was at his peak. Talk about him scoring 104 in 2014. Nobody else scored 90 f***ing points that year. Also mcdavid dropped 20+ points last season from the year prior at the same age crosby was. A peak is a peak. It doesnt last forever

 

[WalterLundy]

Still find it laughable people think crosby couldnt have scred 130 in 2011-2013. He scored 120 in 79 which is 125 in 82 a couple years earlier. In 2011 he was finally recovered from his ankle sprain and was at his peak. Talk about him scoring 104 in 2014. Nobody else scored 90 f***ing points that year. Also mcdavid dropped 20+ points last season from the year prior at the same age crosby was. A peak is a peak. It doesnt last forever

120 in 79 is 120 in 79. It is not 125 in 82. Crosby had 68 points in 41 games in 2007. He also had 95 points in 56 games (1.70 ppg). That is not the same as 139 in 82. Pace is fictional just like Crosby’s peak seasons. League GPG without even accounting for the three levels that go into it were 2.79 in 2011 and 2.95 in 2007. Crosby’s 95 in 56 from 2007 goes down to 90 in 56 in 2011 levels (1.61 ppg). So the same ppg as 2011 Crosby in theory even if when even strength, powerplay and shorthanded are taken separately it goes a little below 2011 Crosby’s ppg. It isn’t better to be injured and have fantasy created for you compared to actually doing it. At least in 2007 Crosby played the full season after somewhat matching 2011 on a per game basis all things era considered.

I’ve watched a lot of hockey in my life and I’ve seen a lot of great players and while Crosby is one of the best I don’t think he should just be given 100% benefit of the doubt for maintaining blistering paces when he’s never proven to sustain anything over 120 points. I have said on many occasions I think 115-125 was possible in 2011 but we won’t know. In 2014 nobody scored above 90 points other than him because his art Ross competition was hurt and missed too many games to compete. He was still the best but his teammate Malkin had a 98-99 point pace going which tightens it quite a bit but it’s not real.

To try and equate Crosby’s 13-14 and 14-15 seasons to McDavid’s last two is ludicrous. McDavid dropped 21 points from his 153 point season which was the best thing we have seen in hockey for a full standard 82 game season since at least 1996. Possibly 1993. Even then McDavid played hurt missing 6 games and from November 24th onward had 158 in 85 games including the playoffs. That’s the same level as 2023 but while injured. Averaging over 2 points per game for 54 games from that Nov 24 date to briefly snag the Ross lead against Anaheim against better top end competition than we have seen since the late 90s Jagr is insane. Then to go on and break a Gretzky record/set an all time era adjusted playoff points record. Come on.

Gretzky (and Lemieux) are well above generational levels offensively. Jagr was generational offensively. McDavid even better than that. If healthy Crosby would have been pretty close to Jagr but I can’t sit here and pretend that he was in this regard.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Nobody is debating scoring being up and I know why it’s gone up although I do applaud the amount of info you packed into that post. It’s the reason for a lot of things. Crosby’s ppg streak would have died out by now if scoring didn’t go up. McDavid wouldn’t have scored 150+ points if it occurred in the 2011-2017 range. That 153 also wouldn’t have been 110 than either more like 130-140.

McDavid played the first two seasons of his career in this low scoring environment where the superstars of a decade ago were still in prime form. From 2015-16 to 2016-17 here are the top 5 in ppg:

Kane: 1.19
McDavid: 1.17
Crosby: 1.12
Malkin: 1.09
Kucherov: 1.00

McDavid was right there with the best per game producer in the league in the tail end of DPE 2.0 as a 19-20 year old. He (and to a slightly lesser extent Kucherov) are right there with the three best point getters of those years who are in their prime and they did this before theirs really started. I’m not saying adjustments are perfect but it’s obvious that a 24-27 year old McDavid shreds this period like a head of cabbage as well if he’s arguably the best as a rookie/sophomore back then as is. What he’d actually put up is unknown but there is no reason to believe it wouldn’t be by far the highest totals of the period.

On the other hand we have no reason to believe that any of the Crosby, Malkin, Kane and Ovechkin crop would put up 140 and above in todays scoring environment. McDavid (especially him), Kucherov and MacKinnon have had better seasons than that group of players. Regular and when adjusted in some way. To me that does matter but since I know now how you view it I get why it doesn’t move the needle for you. Goals per game from 18-24 are at 3.02 and from 11-17 were at 2.68. That is a big difference as I’ve admitted scoring is for sure up. This increase however does not turn a 100-110 player into a 140-150 player. It moves that 100-110 guy into a 113 to 124 guy. Only Crosby’s shortened seasons would be boosted to 140 point paces and those are just that.

Overall the argument boils down to sticking to comparing peers vs peers. That is fine and I respect/understand it but you have to realize that it isn’t the only way to do this sort of thing and not without it’s flaws either. I feel the same way about that as you do with adjustments as I feel that the quality of peers being dominated fluctuates and not everything is equal.

A big laugh at the bolded part—you put too much weight on scoring environment and adjusted stats. If putting up a points-per-game season year in and year out was so easy, then why haven’t players like Malkin, Ovechkin, Kane, and Stamkos (who’s from Crosby’s generation) been able to do it even in today’s league?

Sometimes you have to give credit where credit is due. Crosby could adapt his game better than anyone and remain elite regardless of the era. It’s no accident that his longevity is only matched by Gretzky and Howe at this point. It’s really dishonest to play the "what if" game and downplay someone’s accomplishments that are only matched by one other player in history, based on an overrated scoring environment argument. You really come across as an undercover Crosby hater with some of your posts.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

120 in 79 is 120 in 79. It is not 125 in 82. Crosby had 68 points in 41 games in 2007. He also had 95 points in 56 games (1.70 ppg). That is not the same as 139 in 82. Pace is fictional just like Crosby’s peak seasons. League GPG without even accounting for the three levels that go into it were 2.79 in 2011 and 2.95 in 2007. Crosby’s 95 in 56 from 2007 goes down to 90 in 56 in 2011 levels (1.61 ppg). So the same ppg as 2011 Crosby in theory even if when even strength, powerplay and shorthanded are taken separately it goes a little below 2011 Crosby’s ppg. It isn’t better to be injured and have fantasy created for you compared to actually doing it. At least in 2007 Crosby played the full season after somewhat matching 2011 on a per game basis all things era considered.

I’ve watched a lot of hockey in my life and I’ve seen a lot of great players and while Crosby is one of the best I don’t think he should just be given 100% benefit of the doubt for maintaining blistering paces when he’s never proven to sustain anything over 120 points. I have said on many occasions I think 115-125 was possible in 2011 but we won’t know. In 2014 nobody scored above 90 points other than him because his art Ross competition was hurt and missed too many games to compete. He was still the best but his teammate Malkin had a 98-99 point pace going which tightens it quite a bit but it’s not real.

To try and equate Crosby’s 13-14 and 14-15 seasons to McDavid’s last two is ludicrous. McDavid dropped 21 points from his 153 point season which was the best thing we have seen in hockey for a full standard 82 game season since at least 1996. Possibly 1993. Even then McDavid played hurt missing 6 games and from November 24th onward had 158 in 85 games including the playoffs. That’s the same level as 2023 but while injured. Averaging over 2 points per game for 54 games from that Nov 24 date to briefly snag the Ross lead against Anaheim against better top end competition than we have seen since the late 90s Jagr is insane. Then to go on and break a Gretzky record/set an all time era adjusted playoff points record. Come on.

Gretzky (and Lemieux) are well above generational levels offensively. Jagr was generational offensively. McDavid even better than that. If healthy Crosby would have been pretty close to Jagr but I can’t sit here and pretend that he was in this regard.

Here we go

 

[WalterLundy]

A big laugh at the bolded part—you put too much weight on scoring environment and adjusted stats. If putting up a points-per-game season year in and year out was so easy, then why haven’t players like Malkin, Ovechkin, Kane, and Stamkos (who’s from Crosby’s generation) been able to do it even in today’s league?

Sometimes you have to give credit where credit is due. Crosby could adapt his game better than anyone and remain elite regardless of the era. It’s no accident that his longevity is only matched by Gretzky and Howe at this point. It’s really dishonest to play the "what if" game and downplay someone’s accomplishments that are only matched by one other player in history, based on an overrated scoring environment argument. You really come across as an undercover Crosby hater with some of your posts.

Don’t go there. I’ve never said anything wrong about Crosby. I’ve consistently had him 5th all time and can see anything in the 5-7 range. Saying that I’ve seen 4 offensive talents clearly better than him is not the knock you think it is. Even if his ppg streak did die out if scoring didn’t go up they would still be excellent seasons at his age and any age really. I’ve never said his longevity and ability to sustain elite play into his late 30s now wasn’t impressive. Saying that Gretzky’s ppg streak wouldn’t have died in 1999 if it was played in a higher scoring year isn’t inaccurate and what I said about a higher scoring environment help (key word help) Crosby sustain his ppg seasons also isn’t inaccurate. You can laugh at it but you are really reaching here.

If anything in conversation Crosby and Lemieux advocates have bring up pace and era adjustments to try to make up for what would be lacking when compared to say a Gretzky or McDavid. I’m not the what if game player. That’s a whole other group on here. The only reason I’ve adopted using adjusted stats and learned everything about them is to appease these very people and people like them. I’d much rather not use them but since they are welcomed here I use them so I don’t have my posts disregarded as using only “raw totals”.

Here we go

Steelers. About the quality of reply I expected.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Don’t go there. I’ve never said anything wrong about Crosby. I’ve consistently had him 5th all time and can see anything in the 5-7 range. Saying that I’ve seen 4 offensive talents clearly better than him is not the knock you think it is. Even if his ppg streak did die out if scoring didn’t go up they would still be excellent seasons at his age and any age really. I’ve never said his longevity and ability to sustain elite play into his late 30s now wasn’t impressive. Saying that Gretzky’s ppg streak wouldn’t have died in 1999 if it was played in a higher scoring year isn’t inaccurate and what I said about a higher scoring environment help (key word help) Crosby sustain his ppg seasons also isn’t inaccurate. You can laugh at it but you are really reaching here.

If anything in conversation Crosby and Lemieux advocates have bring up pace and era adjustments to try to make up for what would be lacking when compared to say a Gretzky or McDavid. I’m not the what if game player. That’s a whole other group on here. The only reason I’ve adopted using adjusted stats and learned everything about them is to appease these very people and people like them. I’d much rather not use them but since they are welcomed here I use them so I don’t have my posts disregarded as using only “raw totals”.


Steelers. About the quality of reply I expected.

However, you did flat out say Crosby’s ppg season streak would’ve die if not for scoring going up, (I even highlighted your post), which means you placed a certain asterisk on Crosby’s accomplishment. I think it's unfair since he has played near his prime level throughout his whole career.

My issue about adjusted stats and scoring environment is that it’s very limited and doesn’t tell the whole story. Don’t get me wrong, it does *help* a player’s point production, but they are not the sole factor and are certainly not an exact science

For example, in 2001-02, Jarome Iginla won the Art Ross and Rocket Richard trophies with 96 points and 52 goals in a league scoring environment of 2.61 (one of the lowest scoring seasons in modern history). Just four years later, in 2005-06, Iginla scored a whopping 67 points (54th in the league) in a league scoring environment of 3.08. Then, two years later, in the 2007-08, Iginla had one of his best seasons, again in a low-scoring environment (2.78), finishing with 98 points and 50 goals (3rd in the league).

That said, every season is a different animal, and some players are better suited for low-scoring environments (and vice versa).

 

[WalterLundy]

However, you did flat out say Crosby’s ppg season streak would’ve die if not for scoring going up, (I even highlighted your post), which means you placed a certain asterisk on Crosby’s accomplishment. I think it's unfair since he has played near his prime level throughout his whole career.

My issue about adjusted stats and scoring environment is that it’s very limited and doesn’t tell the whole story. Don’t get me wrong, it does *help* a player’s point production, they are not the sole factor and are certainly not an exact science

For example, in 2001-02 season, Jarome Iginla won the Art Ross and Rocket Richard trophies with 96 points and 52 goals in a league scoring environment of 2.61 (one of the lowest scoring seasons in modern history). Just four years later, in 2005-06, Iginla scored only 67 points (54th in the league) in a league scoring environment of 3.08. Then, two years later, in the 2007-08, Iginla had one of his best seasons, again in a low-scoring environment (2.78), finishing with 98 points and 50 goals (3rd in the league).

That said, every season is a different animal, and some players are better suited for low-scoring environments (and vice versa).

That’s fair. I probably shouldn’t have worded it like that. I think higher scoring has for sure aided it but to say it definitively would have died out is wrong. You’re right here.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Nobody is debating scoring being up and I know why it’s gone up although I do applaud the amount of info you packed into that post. It’s the reason for a lot of things. Crosby’s ppg streak would have died out by now if scoring didn’t go up. McDavid wouldn’t have scored 150+ points if it occurred in the 2011-2017 range. That 153 also wouldn’t have been 110 than either more like 130-140.

McDavid played the first two seasons of his career in this low scoring environment where the superstars of a decade ago were still in prime form. From 2015-16 to 2016-17 here are the top 5 in ppg:

Kane: 1.19
McDavid: 1.17
Crosby: 1.12
Malkin: 1.09
Kucherov: 1.00

McDavid was right there with the best per game producer in the league in the tail end of DPE 2.0 as a 19-20 year old. He (and to a slightly lesser extent Kucherov) are right there with the three best point getters of those years who are in their prime and they did this before theirs really started. I’m not saying adjustments are perfect but it’s obvious that a 24-27 year old McDavid shreds this period like a head of cabbage as well if he’s arguably the best as a rookie/sophomore back then as is. What he’d actually put up is unknown but there is no reason to believe it wouldn’t be by far the highest totals of the period.

On the other hand we have no reason to believe that any of the Crosby, Malkin, Kane and Ovechkin crop would put up 140 and above in todays scoring environment. McDavid (especially him), Kucherov and MacKinnon have had better seasons than that group of players. Regular and when adjusted in some way. To me that does matter but since I know now how you view it I get why it doesn’t move the needle for you. Goals per game from 18-24 are at 3.02 and from 11-17 were at 2.68. That is a big difference as I’ve admitted scoring is for sure up. This increase however does not turn a 100-110 player into a 140-150 player. It moves that 100-110 guy into a 113 to 124 guy. Only Crosby’s shortened seasons would be boosted to 140 point paces and those are just that.

Overall the argument boils down to sticking to comparing peers vs peers. That is fine and I respect/understand it but you have to realize that it isn’t the only way to do this sort of thing and not without its flaws either. I feel the same way about that as you do with adjustments as I feel that the quality of peers being dominated fluctuates and not everything is equal.

The thing is, you have no reason to believe McDavid would put up 130+ in 2014-2017 either in a much more tight checking environment. You seem to be ignoring that while scoring goes up, it favours the top players much more than the depth players and you are not able to exactly quantify the effect.

I’ll try to explain it to you differently. With your adjustment, Crosby’s 2014 season gets adjusted to 116 points, based on 2019 scoring. That is a 11,5% upgrade.

I’ll do the same exercice with the players I mentioned in my previous post with the % upgrade they benefited by playing in a much more wide open scoring environment, in 2019, compared to their production in 2017, which was the last season of the DPE 2.0.

MacKinnon
2019: 99 in 82 (1,21)
2017: 53 in 82 (0,65)

86% upgrade

Kucherov
2019: 128 in 82 (1,56)
2017: 85 in 74 (1,15)

36% upgrade

Draisaitl
2019: 105 in 82 (1,28)
2017: 77 in 82 (0,94)

36% upgrade

Marner
2019: 94 in 82 (1,15)
2017: 61 in 77 (0,79)

46% upgrade

Pastrnak
2019: 81 in 66 (1,23)
2017: 70 in 75 (0,93)

32% upgrade

Panarin
2019: 87 in 79 (1,10)
2017: 74 in 82 (0,90)

22% upgrade

Tkachuk
2019: 77 in 80 (0,96)
2017: 48 in 76 (0,63)

52% upgrade

Matthews
2019: 73 in 68 (1,07)
2017: 69 in 82 (0,84)

27% upgrade

Aho
2019: 83 in 82 (1,01)
2017: 49 in 82 (0,60)

69% upgrade

Gaudreau
2019: 99 in 82 (1,21)
2017: 61 in 72 (0,85)

42% upgrade

Stamkos (Injured in 2017)
2019: 98 in 82 (1,20)
2016: 64 in 77 (0,83)

45% upgrade

Huberdeau (Injured in 2017)
2019: 92 in 82 (1,12)
2016: 59 in 76 (0,78)

44% upgrade

Barkov
2019: 96 in 82 (1,17)
2017: 52 in 61 (0,85)

38% upgrade

Kane
2019: 110 in 81 (1,36)
2017: 89 in 82 (1,09)

25% upgrade

Ovechkin
2019: 89 in 81 (1,10)
2017: 69 in 82 (0,84)

31% upgrade

McDavid
2019: 116 in 78 (1,49)
2017: 100 in 82 (1,22)

22% upgrade

So, I just gave you a 15-16 sample size of some of the best players of the 2020s to show you how much their production befitted of the difference in scoring environment vs how much your adjustments actually give credit to the top players (only a +11% adjusted production for Crosby in 2014, +12% for Kane in 2016, 12% for Malkin in 2012 and 9% for Ovechkin in 2008).

No player benefited of less than a 20% upgrade in production. If you only look at the absolute top players in the game, you see that all of them benefitted of at least a 30% upgrade in production (Kucherov/Draisaitl/MacKinnon). McDavid only had a 22% upgrade, which can be explained by him having a really good 2017 season, compared to his peers.

In conclusion, that evidence clearly showed that top players benefited much more from the higher scoring environment than your adjusted method takes into account. It’s very likely that Crosby, Kane, Ovechkin and Malkin would have benefited from AT THE VERY LEAST a 20% upgrade in production if they were at the top of their game, in 2019, and likely more.

 

[Video Nasty]

The thing is, you have no reason to believe McDavid would put up 130+ in 2014-2017 either in a much more tight checking environment. You seem to be ignoring that while scoring goes up, it favours the top players much more than the depth players and you are not able to exactly quantify the effect.

I’ll try to explain it to you differently. With your adjustment, Crosby’s 2014 season gets adjusted to 116 points, based on 2019 scoring. That is a 11,5% upgrade.

I’ll do the same exercice with the players I mentioned in my previous post with the % upgrade they benefited by playing in a much more wide open scoring environment, in 2019, compared to their production in 2017, which was the last season of the DPE 2.0.

MacKinnon
2019: 99 in 82 (1,21)
2017: 53 in 82 (0,65)

86% upgrade

Kucherov
2019: 128 in 82 (1,56)
2017: 85 in 74 (1,15)

36% upgrade

Draisaitl
2019: 105 in 82 (1,28)
2017: 77 in 82 (0,94)

36% upgrade

Marner
2019: 94 in 82 (1,15)
2017: 61 in 77 (0,79)

46% upgrade

Pastrnak
2019: 81 in 66 (1,23)
2017: 70 in 75 (0,93)

32% upgrade

Panarin
2019: 87 in 79 (1,10)
2017: 74 in 82 (0,90)

22% upgrade

Tkachuk
2019: 77 in 80 (0,96)
2017: 48 in 76 (0,63)

52% upgrade

Matthews
2019: 73 in 68 (1,07)
2017: 69 in 82 (0,84)

27% upgrade

Aho
2019: 83 in 82 (1,01)
2017: 49 in 82 (0,60)

69% upgrade

Gaudreau
2019: 99 in 82 (1,21)
2017: 61 in 72 (0,85)

42% upgrade

Stamkos (Injured in 2017)
2019: 98 in 82 (1,20)
2016: 64 in 77 (0,83)

45% upgrade

Huberdeau (Injured in 2017)
2019: 92 in 82 (1,12)
2016: 59 in 76 (0,78)

44% upgrade

Barkov
2019: 96 in 82 (1,17)
2017: 52 in 61 (0,85)

38% upgrade

Kane
2019: 110 in 81 (1,36)
2017: 89 in 82 (1,09)

25% upgrade

Ovechkin
2019: 89 in 81 (1,10)
2017: 69 in 82 (0,84)

31% upgrade

McDavid
2019: 116 in 78 (1,49)
2017: 100 in 82 (1,22)

22% upgrade

So, I just gave you a 15-16 sample size of some of the best players of the 2020s to show you how much their production befitted of the difference in scoring environment vs how much your adjustments actually give credit to the top players (only a +11% adjusted production for Crosby in 2014, +12% for Kane in 2016, 12% for Malkin in 2012 and 9% for Ovechkin in 2008).

No player benefited of less than a 20% upgrade in production. If you only look at the absolute top players in the game, you see that all of them benefitted of at least a 30% upgrade in production (Kucherov/Draisaitl/MacKinnon). McDavid only had a 22% upgrade, which can be explained by him having a really good 2017 season, compared to his peers.

In conclusion, that evidence clearly showed that top players benefited much more from the higher scoring environment than your adjusted method takes into account. It’s very likely that Crosby, Kane, Ovechkin and Malkin would have benefited from AT THE VERY LEAST a 20% upgrade in production if they were at the top of their game, in 2019, and likely more.

The problem with quite a few of your highlighted players is that you seem to be ignoring age and the bump that usually naturally occurs after a few seasons in the league.

Kucherov went from 66 in 77 in 2015-2016 to 85 in 74 in 2016-2017. The scoring environments were similar and he was still only 23.

Matthews was a 19 year old rookie.

McDavid was a 20 year old sophomore.

MacKinnon was 21 and had a weird career development curve. He also had 10 points more as an 18 year old rookie in the same scoring environment.

You’re ignoring that Draisaitl scored at a slightly lower rate in 2017-2018 than he did in 2016-2017, even though scoring took its first noticeable step forward. Either way, he was still only 23 entering the 2018-2019 season.

I highlighted who I consider the top 5 forwards right now. I like your work and there’s a kernel of truth in there somewhere (indeed, scoring is up, and Crosby, Ovechkin, and Stamkos are great examples to build a point around), but too much of your argument revolves around comparing the production of mostly 19-21 year olds and their production a few years later, which is usually a dramatic jump in any era.

Another thing to consider is that outliers exist in many of the great’s careers. Sakic achieved pretty much the same production at age 31 in a lower scoring environment similar to DPE 2.0 as he did in a scoring environment similar to today’s which resembles the 1995-1996 season, when he was 26. It’s not exactly crazy that Kane at age 30 puts up 110 in 82 in 2018-2019 when he did 106 in 82 in 2015-2016 at 27.