Does a cup affect McDavid’s legacy?

[Our Lady Peace]

With the way most people see into the expectations of a prospective Hall of Famer's resume, you could assume inevitably it will affect his "legacy" to some degree anyway.

However, at this point he's pretty much universally regarded as the best player in the NHL and a clear level above everyone else... Has been since his 2nd or 3rd season. I'd expect he will continue that way for at least another half decade. It's a pretty fast and tight game we have nowadays and it's amazing to see that not a single player has had an answer for him.

Despite the Oilers defensive and goaltending woes, he's clearly capable of putting a playoff series on his back. Last year was quite the show he put on, and I think we can all agree as hockey fans he's been a total beauty to watch. I for one would be very happy to see him hoist the cup even though the Oilers aren't my team.

I think it shouldn't affect his legacy because even if his teams weren't good enough, he'd generally be the absolute last guy anyone should be blaming.

 

[6ix]

Of course never winning a cup would negatively affect his legacy. If he still doesn’t have a cup when his contract expires, I legit would not be shocked if he only signed 1 or 2 year deals with contenders until he wins one, before locking in to another long term contract.

 

[Mulletman]

A cup win for McDavid probably affects Crosby's legacy more than it will affect McDavid's legacy. If McDavid wins the cup and Conn Smythe this year he locks down the top 5 all time spot.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

The teammate he dominates in the regular season is better than him in the playoffs. That's the sentiment behind great regular season player.

And the greatness continues in the playoffs.

 

[Bank Shot]

Yes, it does.

Has there been a generational player that hasn't won a Cup? It's literally what you play for. How can you be the greatest at something without ever reaching the pinnacles that your peers do?

Part of winning the Cup is it dispels the myth that you can't win. Remember Ovechkin? The argument was always he's a great player, but you can't win a Cup with him. He restructured his game, focused more on defence, his stats took a hit but he won a Cup.

If McDavid doesn't win a Cup, he'll be the best player to never win a Stanley Cup IMO. It will prevent him from being considered with the all-time greats. I'd have him behind Crosby if he can't win one.

The bolded was all a dumbass narrative invented after the fact Ovechkin won a Cup.

Some people like to believe that winning a Cup doesn't involve a good amount of good fortune and tell themselves fairytales about how players reinvented their games to climb to the pinnacle.

Some people like to simplify things into easy to digest cause and effect narratives that arent really true at all.

The reality is that a lot of random stuff happens in the Stanley Cup playoffs and playing on a good team for a long time gives you a shot but guarantees nothing.

 

[AvsFan29]

Name a top 5-10 player of all time that doesn't have a cup. He needs a cup or two to really cement his career. He will be a major outlier otherwise

 

[Bank Shot]

Name a top 5-10 player of all time that doesn't have a cup. He needs a cup or two to really cement his career. He will be a major outlier otherwise

There aren't any, but a 6 or 12 or even 21 team league is different than a 32 team league.

Ray Bourque was probably the closest to missing. He had to be airlifted into a contender at the age of 38 to get his Cup.

He's considered a top 2 defenceman of all time by many. Would he fall out of the top ten if he hadn't won a Cup at age 40?

Shouldn't. But some people lack critical thinking skills.

 

[Monsieur Miz]

If he plays every playoffs like he did during the last ones and doesn't win a cup... what else is he supposed to do? He was a freakin' beast.

So nah, I don't think it would.

 

[Signupnow]

Nha. He's from Canada.

 

[rogking65]

Yes, it does.

Has there been a generational player that hasn't won a Cup? It's literally what you play for. How can you be the greatest at something without ever reaching the pinnacles that your peers do?

Part of winning the Cup is it dispels the myth that you can't win. Remember Ovechkin? The argument was always he's a great player, but you can't win a Cup with him. He restructured his game, focused more on defence, his stats took a hit but he won a Cup.

If McDavid doesn't win a Cup, he'll be the best player to never win a Stanley Cup IMO. It will prevent him from being considered with the all-time greats. I'd have him behind Crosby if he can't win one.

stupid argument often used by non thinkers. This is not the NBA. How is a player who is one of 6 on the ice and only plays approx 30 percent of a game responsible fot the TEAM winning or losing. I guess he should stand behind his goalie as well to stop any pucks the goalie misses. 1 player cannot be responsible for the success of a team. Also with 32 teams in the league foe a team to win more than 1 cup in 32 yrs they are doing better than average. The best players are only effective for at most 15 yrrs

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

stupid argument often used by non thinkers. This is not the NBA. How is a player who is one of 6 on the ice and only plays approx 30 percent of a game responsible fot the TEAM winning or losing. I guess he should stand behind his goalie as well to stop any pucks the goalie misses. 1 player cannot be responsible for the success of a team. Also with 32 teams in the league foe a team to win more than 1 cup in 32 yrs they are doing better than average. The best players are only effective for at most 15 yrrs

6 teams or 32. The great ones always find a way to win.

That’s what separates em from the rest.

 

[rogking65]

6 teams or 32. The great ones always find a way to win.

That’s what separates em from the rest.

yes .in tennis or golf

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

yes .in tennis or golf

Nope.

Name a team sport, google anyones top 5 in that sport and 99 percent of those lists has won a championship.

It’s impossible to be in the conversation without one. Team sports have been around forever and that’s always been the case and will always be the case.

The entire purpose of playing is to win it all, if you haven’t accomplished this then you simply don’t belong in the conversation.

 

[ozzie]

He has so much of a career ahead of him, he could continue to lead league in scoring, he could break 2000 points, he could do a lot of things that might make the lack of a cup minor thing. But it will always be a sore point and he would replace Marcel Dionne as the best play to never win a cup. He can still be recognized as one of the most skilled and best players ever, just not a champion. Both can be true. But you are kidding yourself if you don't think it will impact his legacy.

 

[Last Laf]

Two words, Marcel Dionne

 

[Divine]

The bolded was all a dumbass narrative invented after the fact Ovechkin won a Cup.

Some people like to believe that winning a Cup doesn't involve a good amount of good fortune and tell themselves fairytales about how players reinvented their games to climb to the pinnacle.

Some people like to simplify things into easy to digest cause and effect narratives that arent really true at all.

The reality is that a lot of random stuff happens in the Stanley Cup playoffs and playing on a good team for a long time gives you a shot but guarantees nothing.

What? Are you new to hockey? Ovechkin not being able to win the Cup was always a mark against him in comparison to Crosby.

 

[loosemoose]

Obviously. All the true greats have won a Cup.

 

[rogking65]

Nope.

Name a team sport, google anyones top 5 in that sport and 99 percent of those lists has won a championship.

It’s impossible to be in the conversation without one. Team sports have been around forever and that’s always been the case and will always be the case.

The entire purpose of playing is to win it all, if you haven’t accomplished this then you simply don’t belong in the conversation.

so explain to me how

Nope.

Name a team sport, google anyones top 5 in that sport and 99 percent of those lists has won a championship.

It’s impossible to be in the conversation without one. Team sports have been around forever and that’s always been the case and will always be the case.

The entire purpose of playing is to win it all, if you haven’t accomplished this then you simply don’t belong in the conversation.

so explain to me how Mcdavid is responsible for the team assembled around him and the coaching aspect of the game. I guess the GM and coach are just figureheads and Mcdavid makes all the important moves

 

[Arthur Morgan]

yup, if he doesnt win he will go down as the greatest player to never win anything; not winning one will never place him with the greats. sorry but cups matter; yes its a team sport but he needs to lead his team there atleast once.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

so explain to me how

so explain to me how Mcdavid is responsible for the team assembled around him and the coaching aspect of the game. I guess the GM and coach are just figureheads and Mcdavid makes all the important moves

Mcdavid is not solely responsible for the Oilers success or failures but he certainly has a role in it.

 

[Divine]

stupid argument often used by non thinkers. This is not the NBA. How is a player who is one of 6 on the ice and only plays approx 30 percent of a game responsible fot the TEAM winning or losing. I guess he should stand behind his goalie as well to stop any pucks the goalie misses. 1 player cannot be responsible for the success of a team. Also with 32 teams in the league foe a team to win more than 1 cup in 32 yrs they are doing better than average. The best players are only effective for at most 15 yrrs

You think too little.

You can't be the best in a team sport if you can't beat the other teams. Everything McDavid does is team-based. His assists are only possible because his teammates can score. His goals are mostly assisted by his teammates. He leads the league in powerplay points because his team is good on the powerplay. The second leader in powerplay points is his teammate. The second leader in overall scoring is his teammate. His teammate has won the Art Ross and had more PPG than him in the same season. His teammate is outscoring him in playoff scoring despite playing all the same games.

Stop acting like McDavid can't win because he's the greatest player of all-time on the worst team of all-time. You're already making excuses for him and he's only 26. He has time to win a championship. You can't be considered among the greats without winning, it's never happened.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

so explain to me how

so explain to me how Mcdavid is responsible for the team assembled around him and the coaching aspect of the game. I guess the GM and coach are just figureheads and Mcdavid makes all the important moves

its his team, over his career as a top 10 player he should lead the team to the cup. cups matter and they 100% will matter when its all said and done. he will never ever be a top 5 or 10 player without a cup. just wont happen. Id rather any of those top 10 or over top 20 players over mcdavid if it means ill win atleast one cup over a guy that wouldnt

cups matter and they always will sorry

 

[rogking65]

You think too little.

You can't be the best in a team sport if you can't beat the other teams. Everything McDavid does is team-based. His assists are only possible because his teammates can score. His goals are mostly assisted by his teammates. He leads the league in powerplay points because his team is good on the powerplay. The second leader in powerplay points is his teammate. The second leader in overall scoring is his teammate. His teammate has won the Art Ross and had more PPG than him in the same season. His teammate is outscoring him in playoff scoring despite playing all the same games.

Stop acting like McDavid can't win because he's the greatest player of all-time on the worst team of all-time. You're already making excuses for him and he's only 26. He has time to win a championship. You can't be considered among the greats without winning, it's never happened.

you are doubling down on illogical thinking

 

[Divine]

you are doubling down on illogical thinking

You are doubling down on not thinking.

Tell me, what does McDavid do on the ice without his teammates? You're picking and choosing which team stats to judge a player on in a team sport. It makes no sense. All the stats you're judging McDavid on are team stats. You're picking and choosing which aspects of a team sport to judge a player on. You seem to be a bigger fan of McDavid than you are of hockey.

We can both agree that if McDavid doesn't win a Cup, he'll be the best player to never win a Cup. I'm sure it's not something he'd want to be the best in.

 

[rogking65]

its his team, over his career as a top 10 player he should lead the team to the cup. cups matter and they 100% will matter when its all said and done. he will never ever be a top 5 or 10 player without a cup. just wont happen. Id rather any of those top 10 or over top 20 players over mcdavid if it means ill win atleast one cup over a guy that wouldnt

cups matter and they always will sorry

as another poster commented,there is a lack of critical thinking in this thread