This is weird for me because I made it perfectly clear that I wasn’t comparing Malkin to Recchi, but you’re still trying to argue with me about it.
Again — I brought up Recchi because someone said (paraphrased) “we should rank players by point scoring and then use the rest as a tiebreaker”. I pointed at Recchi as an example of a player who would be overvalued if we did it that way. Which is why we don’t do that.
a) Malkin might be “in the running” as a top-3 player during particular stretches of the past decade, but let’s be real here... he has not been a top-3 player over the past 5 years. During that time we’ve had Karlsson win two Norrises and four 1ASs, McDavid explode onto the scene as the next generational player, Kane be a consistent superstar along with one of the greatest single seasons ever, and of course Crosby and Ovechkin continue to pad their already generational portfolios. Malkin’s not in THAT conversation at all. His argument during the past half-decade is more against the Benns and Girouxs of the league.
b) During Yzerman’s best 10-years, Gretzky, Lemieux, Bourque, and Roy were all clear-cut stronger players than their positional equivalents from 2008-18. So no, Yzerman was not a top-3 or even a top-5 player during that period. And Malkin would not have been either.
c) Forsberg, Lindros, Lemieux were naturally more dominant players than Sakic, but they all spent a lot of time watching from the sidelines. This is particularly true of that run of his from 2001-04, where he was the league’s best center. Of course one could argue that he was benefiting from a lack of competition.
d) Before we even talk about him being ahead of these two, Malkin still needs to show that he belongs ahead of Dionne, Schmidt, Apps, Richard, Boucher, Lalonde, Taylor, and Trottier. I’m open to being educated about how Malkin compares better to his peers than Dionne or Richard, but on the surface I seriously doubt that’s true.
This is like the Recchi thing. I am obviously not arguing Hawerchuk over Malkin. The next part of your post addresses my actual comment:
It’s relevant because I’m making the exact point you are making here, that the second half of Malkin’s career is a complete unknown and we would not do well to make assumptions about it. Maybe he’s a Hawerchuk, maybe he’s an Yzerman. We don’t know.
For the purposes of this project, all we can do is rank him according to his accomplishments as of today. This is the history board, not the future speculation board.
No he’s not, and I believe you are in a minority on that position.
His counter-examples are the reason he’s on this list in the first place. His long stretches of indifferent play are why he’s not ranked higher.
Malkin’s career is not better than Yzerman’s as of right now, so I refuse to humor that example.
Sorry but you keep changing the goal post. I went back and re-read all the replies.
You started by saying:
I just can't imagine a world where Malkin is recognized at the level of Sakic and Yzerman. He doesn't have that kind of profile in the league... it would take something totally unforeseen, like Crosby disappearing and Malkin becoming the captain of the Pens and leading them to another 2 or 3 Cups. Just scoring a lot of points isn't going to get it done, when comparing him to guys who were the central figures and captains of teams even better than the present day Pens.
Then the other poster called you out and implied that yes - if Malkin has a clearly better offensive resume it should be enough. And you responded with "well unless you think Mark Recchi needs to be higher on the list".
Bottom line is Malkin is absolutely in contender-ship for a very high slot on an all-time centers list - both if he retired today and if he continues his career with whatever realistic projections you want to make. He has been a higher caliber player in the league for longer at this point in his career than both Yzerman and Sakic had at the same point. You flat out saying that "you can't imagine a world where Malkin is recognized at the level of Sakic and Yzerman" hints at bias. Profile in the league....what does that even mean? That he's underrated? Ok - maybe. But we're supposed to be properly evaluating players here, not just going with hype and popular opinion.
Scoring a lot of points - enough points - will be enough to overtake Sakic and Yzerman. If he has significantly better offense than they do - why shouldn't he overtake them?
As of today, Malkin has:
3 top 10 scoring finishes (adding a 4th this year)
Yzerman has 7, Sakic 9.
But if you look at ppg finishes? Malkin has 8 (adding a 9th this year), Sakic 9, Yzerman 7.
Forsberg has 5 top 10 finishes for points, and 8 for ppg
So yes - Malkin doesn't have many high scoring finishes in the regular season, because since his 4th year in the year he's only played above 70 games once, in 9 years (this year should be 2nd time). But his high point per game finishes in seasons where he played 60-69 games should still count, and speak to his overall abilities as a player, which is a huge component of what we look at when evaluating careers and players all time imo.
If we look at top 5 finishes, Malkin looks quite easily the best of the 4:
Malkin has 3 top 5 point finishes, 6 top 5 PPG finishes (primed to add a 4th and 7th this year)
Sakic has 6 top 5 point finishes, 5 top 5 PPG finishes
Yzerman has 3 top 5 point finishes (you can maybe give him 1 more in 92, where he finished 7th and both 99 and 66 ahead of him), 4 top 5 PPG finishes
Forsberg has 4 top 5 point finishes, 5 top 5 PPG finishes. (You can maybe give him 2 more top 5 PPG finishes since he finished 6th in 96 and 97 when Lemieux was 1st)
So yeah. As of today - Malkin looks to be in very good company among those 4 players, his offense actually seems the best of the bunch in the regular season (especially if you allow for a final 10 game of this season projection, where he'll easily finish top 5 in both points and ppg)
ACTUAL Art Ross? Malkin has 2. Forsberg (1), Sakic (0), Yzerman (0) have 1 combined.
Playoffs.
Malkin has 3 conn smythe worthy runs (2008, 2009 and 2017). Arguably the strongest run between the 4 players (though Sakic himself has a great one too). So it's not like he's lacking much there. He's definitely behind Sakic for playoffs as of today - but not sure i'd have him behind Yzerman.
Going back to your original post on the topic - how Malkin doesn't have a certain profile in the league, and how for him to surpass Sakic/Yzerman he'd have to win 2-3 more cups as the main guy in Pitt with Crosby gone - i'm sorry but that's ludicrous. If Crosby retires tomorrow - and if Malkin leads Pitt to 2-3 more cups as the best player on the team - that's not grounds for him passing Sakic/Yzerman, that's grounds for him reaching Mikita/Messier territory.
Yeah. You are underrating Malkin quite severely here imo.