The classic Mulletman thread formula:
First, have some stat from which an awfully specific conclusion is drawn. For example, Stamkos's playoffs ppg is 0.79 and reg ppg 1.05 so calling him great in playoffs due to this is a bit, eh. Although he was good this year.
Second, have a random faulty or misinterpreted fact such as Teemu Selänne being "a late great."
Third, have an absolutely random tidbit or opinion that has absolutely nothing to do with anything, such as Stamkos being Washington in his previous life.
Nice return to form here.
Can't we all agree Stamkos is a great player and also stop saying he's a 2x Stanley Cup winner? He played 2 minutes and 47 seconds in that 2020 Cup run. Yes technically his name is on it twice but it's disingenuous. It doesn't detract from his HoF career, it's just a difference of being honest vs factual.
But he even scored a goal, right? How could he not be a Stanley cup winner? Scoring a goal is very different from not playing at all and getting the cup due to a technicality. In that case, you'd have an argument, but as is, this is just not a strong position you're taking.