Does a cup affect McDavid’s legacy?

[Arthur Morgan]

a lot of people are going to laugh at your argument

that's fine, you children will grow up eventually and agree in the end

 

[Mr Positive]

Absolutely yes. There are several ways that it is true.

There is no stat that measures true greatness. Even though winning cups requires a lot of other things to go right for a player that is outside their control, it's still the best proof that they are among the best. The fact that someone on a worse team never got that chance doesn't change the fact that they didn't prove themselves on the ultimate stage. Not fair? Life's not fair.

Also, legacy is not a fair quality. It's for casual fans more than it is for hardcore fans. It's like how Star Wars got it's fame from casual masses, moreso than how he hardcore fans could appreciate it. Legacy can be measured in base stats, awards, and cups. McDavid already has a legacy to be remembered, but it's nowhere near what those top elites with longer careers and cups have.

 

[v00d00daddy]

I don’t like this argument. Ovechkin won his Cup because the team played well enough to, not because he restructured his game to focus more on defense. Peak Ovi was a better player than the Ovi that won the Cup.

I agree that a Cup affects McDavid’s legacy though.

But did Ovi have to do more or at least play a different way?

You’re suggesting that had he played the way he did in his peak point/scoring time they’d have won a cup if he had the same support. But it’s a chicken or egg debate.

I always ask this to fans of players that haven’t won a cup. Something I was asked as a kid who loved Lemieux

Would you rather Lemieux wins every art Ross or a cup.

I went from art Ross to cup after he put up ridiculous numbers.

The numbers won’t matter nearly as much if cmd doesn’t lead his team to a cup.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

He didn't restructure anything, if he did then he'd play like that every year and the caps wouldn't be bounced out in round 1 every single year since. As you said, the Caps as a unit pulled through but this is sports and your ultimate goal is to win regardless of how difficult and the greats are judged by their ability to win. If a team with McDavid never wins a cup that is 100% a black mark on his career and he'd be the first person to say so.

Your first sentence is not all that accurate. Your second sentence is the truth. The Caps won when they got a second 1C in Kuznetsov, had great depth players, and Carlson played Norris-caliber hockey. They could have gone deep again in 2018-19 if not for Kempny’s injury right before the playoffs and the cheap shot against Oshie in Carolina that broke his collarbone. Ovechkin’s game in the playoffs hasn’t been the reason they haven’t had more team success.

As to the original question, I think you never want to be on the list of best players to never win the Cup but if anything, I think it’ll be a black stain on the Oilers franchise and not McDavid if they don’t win a Cup with him. He’s the best player in the world and will probably go down as one of the greatest players of all time. To not win a Cup with that is more on the franchise than the player.

 

[TooManyHumans]

Of course it impacts his legacy. I am not sure how this is even a debate. Yeah, it is a team sport but every time a great player's career is considered, whether or how many Cups he won is also brought up.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

Of course it affects his legacy. Winning the cup is the main goal in the NHL.

This is especially true if he were to earn the Conn Smythe trophy

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

For people in this thread, remember that McDavid is succeeding despite the Oilers’ “best” efforts.

 

[Habs10025]

Crosby wouldn't trade his career for McDavid's
Everyone talking about how great McDavid is getting to 800 points in 545 games Crosby got to 800 points in 571 games and never had or needed a player like Draisaitl on his line .
Crosby has played in 5 Conference Final 4 Stanley Cup Final and won 3 Stanley Cups + 2 Olympic Gold Medals He's well over a ppg player in the playoffs and regular season Crosby will play at least another 2 seasons and will be near 1700 career points over 600 goals 1000 assists in the reg season and still only be 37 when that season ends . He's likely to play longer if he doesn't get a serious injury maybe 2 years or more after his current deal .

Will not winning the Stanley Cup have an impact on McDavids legacy yes it will he will be like Dan Marino in football everyone considers him an all time great but its always said he never won the Super Bowl.

 

[Leafidelity]

It absolutely does.

How much does Marcel Dionne even get brought up?

 

[wetcoast]

It’s pretty unanimous Connor is the best player of this generation and among the best of all time already. Especially now that he’s the 5th fastest to 800. His postseason numbers are phenomenal as well yet, because of things out of his control his Oil teams have underwhelmed year in and year out (for the most part). My question is does winning a cup affect his legacy or is it already firmly cemented in the top 10. How much would winning a cup shoot him up the list or does it not change anything seeing how dominant he’s been since he joined the league?

Sadly it really shouldn't matter but winning a SC does affect every players legacy for many people.

 

[wetcoast]

I don’t like this argument. Ovechkin won his Cup because the team played well enough to, not because he restructured his game to focus more on defense. Peak Ovi was a better player than the Ovi that won the Cup.

I agree that a Cup affects McDavid’s legacy though.

But he does make a point winning a SC makes it easier for people to make a false narrative as Ovi didn't reinvent himself that season his team mates rose to the occasion.

I also say this as someone who also didn't agree with the "Ovi needs to win a cup to solidify his legacy" as he was already in the conversation as the best goal scorer of all time in 17-18 even if the capitals had lost the SC.

But winning it all has just become such a popular narrative that most people don't even analyze the validity and importance of winning or not winning when evaluating individual performances.

 

[EXTRAS]

Ask Marcel Dionnes legacy

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaa]

Yes, it does. Hockey is a team sport but to get put into the class of the top 5 of all time, you should win a Cup or two.

That said, people use it as a weapon on here. The guy is 26 years old and people act like he has already failed. I saw someone say he is a selfish player who only cares about himself. That kind of crap isn't even remotely true and no real hockey fan would say something like that if you watched him AT ALL.

He could still win 5 Cups in his career. It's more difficult than when other players like Gretzky were doing it with 21 teams or less, but I am sure he will get at least a couple. The Oilers are one or two d-men and a very good goaltending performance away from winning one now, in my opinion.

 

[Planetov]

Can’t the answer simply be it shouldn’t but it will?

 

[Video Nasty]

TLDR: Yes.

Of course it does.

Sports fans are not exactly known for being reasonable or possessing nuance, particularly today where most discussions just revolve around Cup/Ring counting and desperation to crown any current player as the greatest of all time to boost ratings and massage that basic human trait that what is going on right now in the moment is the best something has ever been.

That being said, these type of players nearly always win at least one championship. It would be pretty unusual for McDavid to never lead his team to one.

I don’t think these discussions are really warranted until the proper context is reached. Like Ovechkin’s path for instance. Losing multiple times as a top seed, not winning until season 13, etc. He and his team win the Cup and it remains the only time his team has advanced past the second round in 18 seasons. But to the narrow minded hockey fan, he got the win and it cancels out everything before and after. No understanding whatsoever that it’s a team game or that Ovechkin already had things that made him an all timer who would go on to threaten a true legacy molder, the goals record.

Eh ok. Interesting I guess.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Depends on what "legacy" means

What's Ray Bourque's legacy if, on the literal final day of his career, he DOESN'T win that Cup?

 

[rynryn]

eventually if the Oilers don't build a cup team around him by the time he starts wanning they should facilitate at trade to one of the dominant teams. If you love them, set them free. I don't think there were any timberwolves fans upset to see Garnett finally pick up the trophy. McDavid's name not appearing on the Cup would be...It would almost be offensive as a hockey fan.

 

[Maple Leaf]

I would have left whyte avenue long time ago

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaa]

I would have left whyte avenue long time ago

Good thing Matthews doesn't feel that way, or he would also be somewhere else.

 

[blundluntman]

It affects his legacy sure, but I'd still have him as a top 10 player all time if he keeps dominating the league like he has so far. He has an insane playoff performance that would've earned him a cup more than likely if he played on a good team. I'm not going to assume other top 10 players would win a cup on the Oilers because that's a dumb argument. You need to have a good team built around you to have a shot, period. If the Oilers become a president trophy winner and he doesn't win is the only situation where I'll hold it against him. Either way, I do think he'll win one at some point in his career.

 

[Sugi21]

I mean… you really don’t want the title as the greatest player to never win a Cup

 

[North Cole]

A cup affects everyone's legacy, but it's not the be all end all like some make it out to be.

 

[LTIR]

The answer is Yes..
Lindros would be talked about a lot more had he won a cup..

Guys like Bondra, Turgeon, Palffy, Weight and Bure were legit superstars

 

[Caroline Says ll]

I can seperate an individual from the team. I can view how a player performs in the playoffs. I can be rational and realize that Ovechkin wins the cup based on his performance but also hot goaltending, Carlson, and 32 point Kuznetsov. I can see Crosby go back to back, yet also realise that Kessel, Malkin, Letang and their goalies also played a essential role.

You cannot win a Stanley Cup without depth contributing, defence and goaltending. I do not judge Bourque differently if he does not win with Colorado. I do not view Perry and Seguin better than Thornton because they did win Cups.

 

[TheBeard]

Sadly it really shouldn't matter but winning a SC does affect every players legacy for many people.

I don’t know if it affects their legacy so much as their standing amongst the greats. It’s subjective enough as it is but it definitely comes into play when comparing careers.