- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,192
- 11,019
McDavid disappeared and disappointed in the biggest game of his career in his prime.
So did Mario Lemieux on numerous occasions. -that’s hockey.
McDavid disappeared and disappointed in the biggest game of his career in his prime.
Giving an accurate description of history doesn’t warrant this. A lot of Lemieux’s back issues were on him. That’s true but you probably didn’t know that. The guy I was tagging actually says Lemieux is his second favorite player. Those types of fans you describe exist by the way. If you want any memorabilia, signed jerseys, pictures with players, icetime programs/ game programs going back to the 90s cup teams, 91 finals ticket stubs, etc. I’d be glad to just hand them over since I’m not a real fan. You and the majority of the online pens fans are scum. Go fly a kite."Lifelong Penguins fan".
And I'm actually a Capitals fan who simply thinks Crosby is better than Ovechkin because I'm totally unbiased.
Doesn't that just make this a case of take McDavid for how he is, but we can imagine a bunch of different scenarios for how Mario can improve?
Can we assume that either player gets drafted by better run teams than Edmonton or Pittsburgh?
It will definitely take a toll on his legacy if he doesn't win a cup, preferably in a big role.McDavid disappeared and disappointed in the biggest game of his career in his prime.
This poll results are closer than I was expecting
Crosby was easily the better prospectDefinitely Lemieux.
Do Crosby vs McDavid instead. I did that a year ago or so and Crosby still won. Wonder how that goes over today.
Crosby would still win, he’s still the better player(in their primes)Definitely Lemieux.
Do Crosby vs McDavid instead. I did that a year ago or so and Crosby still won. Wonder how that goes over today.
Crosby was easily the better prospect
Definitely the better prospect. Depends if you use hindsightCrosby was easily the better prospect
@Video Nasty we need you with the quotes regarding this myth/misconception.
He had cancer and a degenerative back condition. Your post is borderline libelous.McDavid. As a prospect he showed he was willing to work to be great. Mario was historically lazy and a lot his health issues were self inflicted.
I love the tag team, hopefully you don't forget to switch accounts one day and quote yourself.Needs to be stickied at this point.
As for the question, Lemieux is the better player and contrary to what some might think, my favorite player of the two, but I’m much more confident I’d get 20 years out of McDavid. I’m not too interested in drafting a player who can’t be bothered to stick to a simple stretch regimen.
If McDavid becomes extremely injury prone and misses significant time from here on out, I’ll be happy to revisit it.
And he actually beat out a healthy Gretzky for the Art Ross five times (three of which happened when Gretzky was 30 or younger).
How do you know this? I don’t remember ever reading or seeing reports that Lemieux let himself go and didn’t care about this healthAll those things were available then. He just didn't care enough to take care of his body.
If we look at Lemieux's career from his 2nd season in the league (1986) until he retired from back injuries and cancer in 1997:
During this 11 year period the only people to ever outscore Lemieux in a season where he played at least 30 or more games were Gretzky (3x), Kurri, Messier and Yzerman.