Mcdavids or Crosby, first 3 seasons

[GreatGonzo]

It only took you one sentence yo contradict yourself, that's a record.

No. That was you not following up with the actual conversation and post that I was quoting. It’s ok though, just next time actually know what your referring to

“you can’t count McDavid not playing in the playoffs!”

“McDavid won consecutive regular season awards that Sid didn’t!”

What’s it gonna be? If you hold up the third regular season highly against Crosby you have to count the playoffs.

love this logic....

It’s the lack of context you guys like to dance around. McDavid isn’t in the playoffs because of the team around him being garbage, yet he is going to walk away with two Scoring titles.

No one taking anything away from Crosbys third season, it’s the fact that his playoffs that year is some how being seen as superior to McDavids regular season. All your saying is it’s more valuable to play 53 regular season games, then have a great playoff to losing in the SCF than to lead the league in scoring and possibly be a Hart consistency/Winner.

Ya talk about flip flopping.

 

[Future GOAT]

No. That was you not following up with the actual conversation and post that I was quoting. It’s ok though, just next time actually know what your referring to

love this logic....

It’s the lack of context you guys like to dance around. McDavid isn’t in the playoffs because of the team around him being garbage, yet he is going to walk away with two Scoring titles.

No one taking anything away from Crosbys third season, it’s the fact that his playoffs that year is some how being seen as superior to McDavids regular season. All your saying is it’s more valuable to play 53 regular season games, then have a great playoff to losing in the SCF than to lead the league in scoring and possibly be a Hart consistency/Winner.

Ya talk about flip flopping.

They don't have anything except hyperbole, what do you expect?

 

[GreatGonzo]

Massive sample size? That begs the question, why would McDavid be "unlucky"?

I don't like the sentiment in this thread, or really most recent McDavid threads. I understand team fans will cling onto it for dear life, but it's got strong support outside of that (which still is understandable).

As you say, McDavid has a not unsubstantial amount games under his belt already over 3 years time, including 2 full seasons. If he keeps being "unlucky" in 2-3 years time this ES/PP argument that keeps on being made won't look very good, and it'd look terrible in 4-6 years time.

He has some room to improve up until his absolute peak, but not because of any regression because he's already playing close to his mean as far as I'm concerned (obviously not referring to this year's PP in a vacuum).

Depsite the PP travesty of this year, over the past three seasons, Kane/Crosby is only producing at ~5% higher per minute rate on the PP, and McDavid is producing at ~18% rate above Ovechkin. The main reason behind his abnormally high ES/PP differences are likely because he has abnormal ES/PP TOI splits (as well as possibly not being able to utilize his edge to the same degree on the PP).

With increased (or insane) volume, often comes decreased quality. We'll have greater clarity in hindsight, as we do with Crosby. Feel free to make fun of me in a few years time.



I'm not making the argument, but you seriously don't believe one can be made for last season based on what they did?

Sure one can, be not based on a pace argument. I understand the whole
Playoff side of things and how did was “better.” But in the end if a stanley cup and Conn Smythe is more valuable, then that opens up a whole other argument.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Welcome to the board where playoffs don’t matter.

Making the playoffs is a team accomplishment. And it’s obvious McDavid lacks the team.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Making the playoffs is a team accomplishment. And it’s obvious McDavid lacks the team.

Maybe, but you have to count Crosby’s playoff performance in 2008. It’s not Sid’s fault if the Oilers doesn’t have a great team. That playoff run is a + for Crosby. During that same time frame (3 first years), McDavid had 9pts in 13 GP... so yes Crosby has the clear edge over Connor in the playoffs throughout their first three seasons.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

Drai for a 4th round pick

Klefbom for a 5th.

RNH for future considerations.


Since "McDavid has nobody good on his team"

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

N
No one taking anything away from Crosbys third season, it’s the fact that his playoffs that year is some how being seen as superior to McDavids regular season. All your saying is it’s more valuable to play 53 regular season games, then have a great playoff to losing in the SCF than to lead the league in scoring and possibly be a Hart consistency/Winner.

Ya talk about flip flopping.

The bolded certainly hasn't been my point. I don't know what daver's point is, so I can't speak for him in that discussion. But anytime I've referenced Crosby's playoffs, it's as part of "which areas of their first three seasons does Crosby have an edge" and their respective playoff performances is one of them.

IMO, Crosby's got the edge in their 1st year and 2nd year, McDavid in their third year. Crosby's also got the edge in playoff performance. So for me, that's 3 out of 4 Crosby edges him out.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Maybe, but you have to count Crosby’s playoff performance in 2008. It’s not Sid’s fault if the Oilers doesn’t have a great team. That playoff run is a + for Crosby. During that same time frame (3 first years), McDavid had 9pts in 13 GP... so yes Crosby has the clear edge over Connor in the playoffs throughout their first three seasons.

I am counting it, I just don’t understand how it’s better than what McDavid did.....

It essentially comes down to playoffs vs regular season, right? And your giving Sid the nod based on what he did in the playoffs. I’m saying that he did have a great performance, but I don’t see how putting up 27 points in 20 games and losing in the SCF is better than McDavid this year. That’s all.

Drai for a 4th round pick

Klefbom for a 5th.

RNH for future considerations.


Since "McDavid has nobody good on his team"

His team is below 500 and he is out producing the 2nd best guy by over 30 points. He has no defense and little goaltending. Why people seem to mock this is beyond me.

 

[GreatGonzo]

The bolded certainly hasn't been my point. I don't know what daver's point is, so I can't speak for him in that discussion. But anytime I've referenced Crosby's playoffs, it's as part of "which areas of their first three seasons does Crosby have an edge" and their respective playoff performances is one of them.

IMO, Crosby's got the edge in their 1st year and 2nd year, McDavid in their third year. Crosby's also got the edge in playoff performance. So for me, that's 3 out of 4 Crosby edges him out.

I’m curious as to why Crosby edges him out in their 2nd season. I know he scored more points, but they also had a successful PP with Malkin. McDavids ES production quite frankly was just to amazing when compared.

Crosby only played 53 games his third season, yet the team still finished with 102 points with a division championship. I understand his playoffs makes up for that, but he obviously had a better team around him, especially with Malkin being the top center and killing it.

If many of you are going to use it against McDavid that his team is out of the playoffs even though he is playing great, you better use the same reasoning for the 08 Pens still being a playoff team despite Crosby missing 29 games.

 

[daver]

If you understand the scoring environments, there really isn't

I agree that scoring environments matter but it is less reasonable to think that McDavid's PPG placing would have stayed the same if he played a full rookie season vs. Crosby's PPG placing staying the same if he played a full 3rd season. McDavid was able to get his feet wet while playing at just under a PPG before his injury. Who knows how long it would have taken him to get things going to where he was after he came back from injury.

At best, those two seasons basically cancel each other, Crosby has a slight edge in his 2nd season, and a huge edge in playoffs.

 

[daver]

They don't have anything except hyperbole, what do you expect?

What's your non-hyperbole arguement that McDavid was better?

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I am counting it, I just don’t understand how it’s better than what McDavid did.....

It essentially comes down to playoffs vs regular season, right? And your giving Sid the nod based on what he did in the playoffs. I’m saying that he did have a great performance, but I don’t see how putting up 27 points in 20 games and losing in the SCF is better than McDavid this year. That’s all.

His team is below 500 and he is out producing the 2nd best guy by over 30 points. He has no defense and little goaltending. Why people seem to mock this is beyond me.

IMO McDavid had the better season too, but Crosby at 20 was simply better than McDavid at 20.

 

[daver]

I’m curious as to why Crosby edges him out in their 2nd season. I know he scored more points, but they also had a successful PP with Malkin. McDavids ES production quite frankly was just to amazing when compared.

Their raw points were very close, all things considered, but Crosby's PPG vs. his peers (the Top 20 scorers) was better than McDavid's. It's a slight edge.

Maybe having Draisatl, the 8th best point getter, on his line was why McDavid had success at ES. Seems like a very moot point to make when a point is a point regardless how it's scored.

 

[Regal]

I agree that scoring environments matter but it is less reasonable to think that McDavid's PPG placing would have stayed the same if he played a full rookie season vs. Crosby's PPG placing staying the same if he played a full 3rd season. McDavid was able to get his feet wet while playing at just under a PPG before his injury. Who knows how long it would have taken him to get things going to where he was after he came back from injury.

At best, those two seasons basically cancel each other, Crosby has a slight edge in his 2nd season, and a huge edge in playoffs.

Yes, I've seen you use this before and it really makes no sense to me. Players of that ilk don't have problems adjusting to the league, and you seem to be implying that missing games with an injury somehow helped him adjust. Why? Playing games helps you adjust, not sitting out. He's not getting better simply by getting a couple months older, especially when he's not going to be able to practice or train properly with a broken collarbone. It's more likely he would have improved as the season went along as he got better with more games under his belt. He had 1 point in his first 4 games, then 11 in his next 9 before injury, with a 7 game point streak. I think he was already "getting things going"

 

[daver]

Yes, I've seen you use this before and it really makes no sense to me. Players of that ilk don't have problems adjusting to the league, and you seem to be implying that missing games with an injury somehow helped him adjust. Why? Playing games helps you adjust, not sitting out. He's not getting better simply by getting a couple months older, especially when he's not going to be able to practice or train properly with a broken collarbone. It's more likely he would have improved as the season went along as he got better with more games under his belt. He had 1 point in his first 4 games, then 11 in his next 9 before injury, with a 7 game point streak. I think he was already "getting things going"

You never know how rookie years pan out and I can also argue Crosby was denied the opportunity to get things going in his 3rd year . In any event, Crosby's playoffs gives him the clear edge.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Their raw points were very close, all things considered, but Crosby's PPG vs. his peers (the Top 20 scorers) was better than McDavid's. It's a slight edge.

Maybe having Draisatl, the 8th best point getter, on his line was why McDavid had success at ES. Seems like a very moot point to make when a point is a point regardless how it's scored.

So the fact that Crosby produced half his points on the PP and that he played on the PP with Malkin and Gonchar, making it a lethal one, shouldn’t be taken into account?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I’m curious as to why Crosby edges him out in their 2nd season. I know he scored more points, but they also had a successful PP with Malkin. McDavids ES production quite frankly was just to amazing when compared.

Because points are points. Producing on the powerplay matters. Oilers fans should know this well because a lack of production on the PP this year is one of the reasons they did so poorly.

I'll stop putting importance on PP points as soon as the Art Ross starts being awarded to the player who scored the most even strength points in a season, rather than total points.

That's the problem with this current argument. The reason ES is being focused on so much is because it favors McDavid, while raw totals don't. If it were the opposite and McDavid was killing it on the PP but not at ES, I 100% guarantee people would be saying "you can't just ignore the points McDavid scored on the powerplay! They count in the scoring race just as much as any other points".

Crosby only played 53 games his third season, yet the team still finished with 102 points with a division championship. I understand his playoffs makes up for that, but he obviously had a better team around him, especially with Malkin being the top center and killing it.

If many of you are going to use it against McDavid that his team is out of the playoffs even though he is playing great, you better use the same reasoning for the 08 Pens still being a playoff team despite Crosby missing 29 games.

Why did you quote me for this second part of your post? I've already said that I'm giving Year 3's regular season to McDavid. So I'm clearly not "using it against him" that his team didn't make it.

My only point about playoff production is you can't just dismiss Crosby producing just because he's got a good team. Again, extreme example, but that would be like saying Wayne Gretzky didn't have an edge in playoff performance over Dale Hawerchuk because Gretzky had a much better supporting cast, so it's not fair to include that.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Because points are points. Producing on the powerplay matters. Oilers fans should know this well because a lack of production on the PP this year is one of the reasons they did so poorly.

I'll stop putting importance on PP points as soon as the Art Ross starts being awarded to the player who scored the most even strength points in a season, rather than total points.

That's the problem with this current argument. The reason ES is being focused on so much is because it favors McDavid, while raw totals don't. If it were the opposite and McDavid was killing it on the PP but not at ES, I 100% guarantee people would be saying "you can't just ignore the points McDavid scored on the powerplay! They count in the scoring race just as much as any other points".



Why did you quote me for this second part of your post? I've already said that I'm giving Year 3's regular season to McDavid. So I'm clearly not "using it against him" that his team didn't make it.

My only point about playoff production is you can't just dismiss Crosby producing just because he's got a good team. Again, extreme example, but that would be like saying Wayne Gretzky didn't have an edge in playoff performance over Dale Hawerchuk because Gretzky had a much better supporting cast, so it's not fair to include that.

But the point difference is only 20. I’m not ignoring the PP, I’m saying that one player scored 120 points, 61 of which on the PP, while the other scored 100, 27 of which on the PP.....but because he had more points, he was better? There’s such a significant difference between their production.

I’m not saying we ignore what Crosby did on PP, that season....I’m saying the difference in their ES points is just far to big to ignore. Not to mention Crosby playing in a much more significant period of PP opportunities with a better supporting cast with the man advantage.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

But the point difference is only 20. I’m not ignoring the PP, I’m saying that one player scored 120 points, 61 of which on the PP, while the other scored 100, 27 of which on the PP.....but because he had more points, he was better? There’s such a significant difference between their production.

I’m not saying we ignore what Crosby did on PP, that season....I’m saying the difference in their ES points is just far to big to ignore. Not to mention Crosby playing in a much more significant period of PP opportunities with a better supporting cast with the man advantage.

But it works the other way, too. When there's more PP ice time, there's less ES ice time. So if you're defending McDavid's powerplay production on him getting less PP ice time (opportunities), you have to also look at Crosby's less ES ice time and prorate his production to what he would have gotten with more.

For instance:
-McDavid got 17:17 of ESTOI per game last year
-Crosby got 14:40 of ESTOI per game in 2006-07
-Crosby scored 59 ES points that year

If Crosby played 17:17 at ES, based on his production per 14:40, he'd have scored 69.5 points that year, or rounded up to 70 points at ES.

Meanwhile,
-McDavid got 3:02 of PP time per game last year
-Crosby got 5:50 of PP time per game in 2006-07
-Crosby scored 61 points on the PP

If Crosby played only 3:02 on the PP, based on his production per 5:50, he'd have scored 31.7 points, or rounded up to 32 PP points.

So if you adjusted BOTH PP time and ES time, Crosby's totals based on the ice time McDavid got last year, Crosby would have still produced 70 ES plus 32 on the PP, for 102 points total. Which is better than McDavid.

And the above doesn't even factor in Crosby did it in 79 games, compared to 82 for McDavid.

So I'd say even if you adjusted for PPs, Crosby's 2nd year was better than McDavid's. And any gap in ES production is more to do with the fact McDavid played almost 3 full minutes more per game at ES. Crosby's actual "per minute" production at ES was pretty much on par with McDavid's.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

So the fact that Crosby produced half his points on the PP and that he played on the PP with Malkin and Gonchar, making it a lethal one, shouldn’t be taken into account?

Oiler fans were giving McDavid primary credit for their team having a top 5/10 PP last year, so he must take much of the blame for them being 31st this year.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Oiler fans were giving McDavid primary credit for their team having a top 5/10 PP last year, so he must take much of the blame for them being 31st this year.

His ES production was great last year as well. He leads his team with 18 PP points, the next closest is 9....Crosby has always been complimented with strong PP players, that’s not debatable, who is in the PP with McDavid? That’s what a lot of Pitt fans like to ignore.

Truly amazing how many posters ve to try to find ways to blame McDavid for his teams faults without any logic what so ever.

 

[GreatGonzo]

But it works the other way, too. When there's more PP ice time, there's less ES ice time. So if you're defending McDavid's powerplay production on him getting less PP ice time (opportunities), you have to also look at Crosby's less ES ice time and prorate his production to what he would have gotten with more.

For instance:
-McDavid got 17:17 of ESTOI per game last year
-Crosby got 14:40 of ESTOI per game in 2006-07
-Crosby scored 59 ES points that year

If Crosby played 17:17 at ES, based on his production per 14:40, he'd have scored 69.5 points that year, or rounded up to 70 points at ES.

Meanwhile,
-McDavid got 3:02 of PP time per game last year
-Crosby got 5:50 of PP time per game in 2006-07
-Crosby scored 61 points on the PP

If Crosby played only 3:02 on the PP, based on his production per 5:50, he'd have scored 31.7 points, or rounded up to 32 PP points.

So if you adjusted BOTH PP time and ES time, Crosby's totals based on the ice time McDavid got last year, Crosby would have still produced 70 ES plus 32 on the PP, for 102 points total. Which is better than McDavid.

And the above doesn't even factor in Crosby did it in 79 games, compared to 82 for McDavid.

So I'd say even if you adjusted for PPs, Crosby's 2nd year was better than McDavid's. And any gap in ES production is more to do with the fact McDavid played almost 3 full minutes more per game at ES. Crosby's actual "per minute" production at ES was pretty much on par with McDavid's.

It’s more the fact that refs were calling more PPs in 2007 than 2017. A lot more, and Crosby was more than happy to draw penalties, because why wouldn’t he? His team was 5th on the PP that year while his team saw the most PP time and the most PP opportunities in the league. He had Gonchar, who was a great PP player, and Malkin came in and made it even more lethal. Edmonton was 17th on the PP, 15th in PP opportunities, and 17th in PP time. Yet he still scored 100 points.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

It’s more the fact that refs were calling more PPs in 2007 than 2017. A lot more, and Crosby was more than happy to draw penalties, because why wouldn’t he? His team was 5th on the PP that year while his team saw the most PP time and the most PP opportunities in the league. He had Gonchar, who was a great PP player, and Malkin came in and made it even more lethal. Edmonton was 17th on the PP, 15th in PP opportunities, and 17th in PP time. Yet he still scored 100 points.

But I was more so focusing on the supposed gap in their ES production, and explaining that a lot of that had to do with less ES time when the PP time is up. And if you take what Crosby produced at ES that year and extrapolated it over how many ES minutes McDavid got last year, his ES production would be roughly within 1 or 2 points of McDavid's.

Unless people really think that Crosby wouldn't score any more than 59 points at ES, even if he got 2 and a half more minutes at ES every game.

Also, while obviously Malkin's a better player *NOW*, I think it's a bit disingenuous to say Malkin was such a big difference in his rookie year compared to what Draisaitl did last year. Malkin finished something like 15th or 16th in scoring that year, while Draisaitl finished top 10. So while obviously Malkin at his best is better than Draisaitl, Malkin as a first year player getting adjusted to the North American game wasn't.

 

[GreatGonzo]

But I was more so focusing on the supposed gap in their ES production, and explaining that a lot of that had to do with less ES time when the PP time is up. And if you take what Crosby produced at ES that year and extrapolated it over how many ES minutes McDavid got last year, his ES production would be roughly within 1 or 2 points of McDavid's.

Unless people really think that Crosby wouldn't score any more than 59 points at ES, even if he got 2 and a half more minutes at ES every game.

Also, while obviously Malkin's a better player *NOW*, I think it's a bit disingenuous to say Malkin was such a big difference in his rookie year compared to what Draisaitl did last year. Malkin finished something like 15th or 16th in scoring that year, while Draisaitl finished top 10. So while obviously Malkin at his best is better than Draisaitl, Malkin as a first year player getting adjusted to the North American game wasn't.

But that still doesn’t change the fact that he was on the PP more so than a lot of players that year. Crosby proved himself as a solid ES producer regardless later on, but ‘07 was such a high scoring year for him because of the PP, I wouldn’t even say that’s was his best season, maybe would put it as his 3rd.

Again focusing on 2007 compared to 2017, McDavid has the better season, it may not be by much, but his superior ES production mixed with his lack of team support I feel our weighs the fact that Crosby scored 20 more points, mainly because of all the PP time.

I mean he had 85 points his first year, and followed it up as one of the top centers in the league the next year when Crosby was out. Having a guy like that on the PP with you is no doubt beneficial. Draisaitl isn’t Malkin, and will never be on his level, nort even close, especially considering that at their best, Malkin is arguably just as great as Crosby. The comparisons between those two needs to stop, because the value they both hold to their team and the impact they have is as different as night and day.

 

[Regal]

You never know how rookie years pan out and I can also argue Crosby was denied the opportunity to get things going in his 3rd year . In any event, Crosby's playoffs gives him the clear edge.

Maybe, but I think everything McDavid has shown so far makes any issues in his rookie year unlikely, and while Crosby may have picked it up, the fact that his numbers were right around what he did the next couple years makes it less likely for me, unless we want to get into the hypothetical of how the high ankle sprain affected his game.

I agree with the bolded, but I consider their regular seasons basically a wash