If Kucherov puts up a 1.77 PPG vs. McDavid's 1.87 PPG in the same season, does it still elevate McDavid to Big Four esque?
I don't see how anyone could argue that it doesn't affect how we perceive McDavid's performance from 22-23. Kucherov is currently on pace for 145 points, in 81 games to boot. If he achieves that, which he is very close to doing(in a slightly lower scoring season with slightly lower minutes FTR) it places him at 95% of McDavid's peak/96% by PPG. While McDavid's performance remains superior largely thanks to the goals gap, the gap has shrunk tremendously.
Though really the perceived gap was never actually as significant as some people thought it to be. Many ignorantly looked solely at raw point totals and concluded that McDavid was '40 points better' than the next best player in the leauge based on skill and ability alone. It was a failure of epic porportions since those people failed to make considerations for what MacKinnon would have achieved were it not for anything other than sheer/random dumb luck rather than actual skills and ability. It should be clear to all now that the gap between McDavid and a player like MacKinnon was never all that large to begin with considering how clearly and emphatically he has proven himself to be a 130+ point capable player. If not for anything other than that dumb luck this likely would be his second 130-point season in a row.
a dude from Russia would only be seen in the Olympics or the Eagleson Cup.
If were talking strickly about the 80's your point stands but by 92-93 that's just blantly wrong - all the best talent in the world was in the NHL by then. It was a time when multiple "d
udes from Russia"(lol) scored 60/70 goals, and gathered 120+ points and Lemieux still dominated over that multi-national field when he played.
You can't call players "unbeatable" if you sare saying they were beat by each other...
The point is not that they were unbeatable, the point is the quality of the player that beat them. The number 1 and 2 greatest offensive players of all time were beaten only by each other. None of their other respective peers even approached their levels. There's little doubt that the inclusion of Soviet talent would have reduced Gretzky's margins of victory in many seasons, but you don't honestly think that anyone of them would have actually bested him during his peak/prime... or do you??? McDavid meanwhile is being beaten by players far below the level of the number #1 or #2 greatest offensive players of all time. He's being beaten by Mike Bossy/Peter Stastny tier players. How differently would we view Gretzky if Bossy, a player who is almost universally seen to be couple of tiers below Gretzky overall, had not
only beaten Gretzky for the Art Ross in 1982-83 but also scored 200 points!? That's the equivalent of what Kucherov is currently doing to McDavid and his legacy. On top of that now imagine a THIRD player, say Sergei Markov, also notching 190+ points that season, which is the equivalent of what MacKinnon is doing to him.
Clearly, the predictions of McDavid's supposed ascension into the 'BIG 4' last season were highly premature. I understand that these are exciting days with players notching totals not seen in some time, but far too many are making preposterously advanced predictions. Another example being Matthews future ascension to the GOAT goal scorer... I mean C'MON!
and I say that as a Matthews fan.
