5th Greatest all time

[The Panther]

Jean Beliveau also missed a lot of time in the NHL and he didn't have a full season until age 23.

Crosby by the same age (23) was miles ahead of Jean and I don't think people actually have done a very good direct comparison season by season between the 2 players.

You should probably learn a bit about the history of Jean Béliveau to understand why that was.

- Crosby has already played more games both in the regular season and playoffs than Mario and Orr.

Sure. And he was far less dominant than both.

- in the 2010-2011 Crosby example even if we lowball his career PPG in the 5 seasons before he easily wins the Art Ross and Hart in that year.

That's fine. Nevertheless, I don't give any player the "top PPG in the NHL" award if they play less than about 75% of the season.

Crosby at this point has an extremely valid case for the 5th best player of all time.

I don't get into these player ranking things much. If I had to guess where I'd rank Crosby now, I'd probably have him somewhere between 10th to 15th.

 

[wetcoast]

You should probably learn a bit about the history of Jean Béliveau to understand why that was.

I know alot about Jean and in fact he only played in the NHL when the Habs bought the entire league that Jean played in.

I give him credit for his entire professional career but I stand by what I said Crosby was quite ahead of Jean in terms of greatness, career value...whatever metric you want to use at age 23 and it's not like Crosby doesn't already have a HHOF worthy career in the 9 seasons since that time.

Sure. And he was far less dominant than both.

Less dominant than Orr (but really who isn't) for sure but in terms of total impact and a 200 foot game ESGF-ESGA there is alot to suggest that the gap between him and Mario isn't really that large.

No doubt Mario was greater offensively and a great PP guy but 5 on 5 Crosby was better career wise

That's fine. Nevertheless, I don't give any player the "top PPG in the NHL" award if they play less than about 75% of the season.

Fair enough my point is that his level of play, or heck even only offensive was and has been at an elite level for his 15 NHL seasons.

I don't get into these player ranking things much. If I had to guess where I'd rank Crosby now, I'd probably have him somewhere between 10th to 15th.

Fair enough but I think that anyone who digs deep and looks at total careers Crosby has an extremely strong case for 5th right now.

 

[GuineaPig]

I think there's a somewhat extreme reluctance to rank active players as high as they might deserve among many. Consider Crosby's ranking on the top playoff performers list, where he ended up behind Doug Gilmour!

 

[daver]

You should probably learn a bit about the history of Jean Béliveau to understand why that was.

That's fine. Nevertheless, I don't give any player the "top PPG in the NHL" award if they play less than about 75% of the season.

So we need context around Beliveau's pre-age 23 career but cannot apply any context about Crosby's seasons where he was out of the running for the Art Ross?

The fact is Crosby measures up extremely well to Hull and Beliveau when all things are considered (peak, prime, playoffs etc..), and can claim a longer period of elite play (seasons where he was the clear best or very close to the best) over both.

Placing him along side any other forward besides those two is a disservice IMO.

 

[daver]

Crosby adds another "Howe-like" Top 5 season to his resume, and is arguably only surpassed by Howe and Wayne in longevity of elite prime based on elite Art Ross finishes/Award placings.

Surely there cannot be any argument that he isn't right there with Beliveau and Hull. Any argument you can make for Beliveau v. Crosby can be made for Crosby v. Hull, and vice versa.

Some discussion about comparing raw Art Ross finishes and Hart placings:

Comparing Top 3, 5 or 10 scoring and Hart finishes from different eras

Some discussion about the playoff resumes of Crosby vs. Beliveau and Howe:

Comparing the playoff resumes of Howe, Beliveau and Crosby

 

[bobholly39]

Crosby is great and all - but if you didn't have him 5th all time prior to this season, I don't think a 4th place hart finish is what brings him over the edge to#5.

That being said - I personally do think he is #5.

I also think McDavid has tremendous opportunity to overtake him. Similar caliber player - healthy (knock on wood, that continues), he's on his way to gathering the regular season legacy Crosby could have had without injuries (maybe even above that). He's still massive ways away, and will especially need some very strong playoff performances eventually, but we'll see.

 

[daver]

Crosby is great and all - but if you didn't have him 5th all time prior to this season, I don't think a 4th place hart finish is what brings him over the edge to#5.

That being said - I personally do think he is #5.

I also think McDavid has tremendous opportunity to overtake him. Similar caliber player - healthy (knock on wood, that continues), he's on his way to gathering the regular season legacy Crosby could have had without injuries (maybe even above that). He's still massive ways away, and will especially need some very strong playoff performances eventually, but we'll see.

Crosby could "Howe" his way to #5, the same Howe "Howe'd" his way to higher than #4 of the Big 4.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

I think there's a somewhat extreme reluctance to rank active players as high as they might deserve among many. Consider Crosby's ranking on the top playoff performers list, where he ended up behind Doug Gilmour!

I believe the voting on that ranking was done before Crosby’s 2017 run. The 2016 Conn Smythe is considered a weak one, it shouldn’t be controversial at all to think that Gilmour had a more impressive playoff career than Crosby without the latter’s 2017 and 2018 runs.

 

[Overrated]

IMO Hasek peaked higher than Jagr and should be regarded as being of the same caliber as Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr.

 

[Overrated]

okay, I was hard on Hull, but I stand by my stance on Jagr. Love the guy, but he has no business in a discussion for 5th best. Top 10-15, sure. The greatest win cups when they are at their greatest. Jagr never won a thing unless his team was carried by Mario.

Peak Jagr won the Olympics and was named the all-star in the World Championships he won in 2005. I know there are NHL purists who insist those tournaments don't count but they are a big deal at least in Europe and the Olympics were a big deal everywhere if I remember correctly.

How many players have "carried" their team to a Cup?

I can't think of any actually.

Diego Maradona

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Crosby is great and all - but if you didn't have him 5th all time prior to this season, I don't think a 4th place hart finish is what brings him over the edge to#5.

That being said - I personally do think he is #5.

I also think McDavid has tremendous opportunity to overtake him. Similar caliber player - healthy (knock on wood, that continues), he's on his way to gathering the regular season legacy Crosby could have had without injuries (maybe even above that). He's still massive ways away, and will especially need some very strong playoff performances eventually, but we'll see.

A 4th place mvp position with another top 3 lindsay finish certainly doesn't hurt. Crosby is 34 now. His championship days are over. All he can pretty much do now is keep having elite seasons. He's just adding elite longevity now that will go along way.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Peak Jagr won the Olympics and was named the all-star in the World Championships he won in 2005. I know there are NHL purists who insist those tournaments don't count but they are a big deal at least in Europe and the Olympics were a big deal everywhere if I remember correctly.


Diego Maradona

Carried might just be the word for Maradona. If you get what I'm saying lol

 

[Boxscore]

Not saying that he's the 5th greatest player in history, but if the games mattered, I'd take Messier over any of the names mentioned -- Beliveau, Hull, Hasek, Jagr, Bourque, Ovechkin, etc.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Crosby is great and all - but if you didn't have him 5th all time prior to this season, I don't think a 4th place hart finish is what brings him over the edge to#5.

I dunno, I do actually think that a fairly high Hart finish is a lot stronger of a look than not having a fairly high Hart finish.

If nothing else, it avoids a potential negative that could drop him out of the conversation entirely. Look at what Crosby did at age 33, then look at what Morenz did at age 33.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Not saying that he's the 5th greatest player in history, but if the games mattered, I'd take Messier over any of the names mentioned -- Beliveau, Hull, Hasek, Jagr, Bourque, Ovechkin, etc.

Messier gets by on narrative bias (and specifically "the guarantee") more than just about any of the other all-time greats (I'm trying to think of someone in that cohort who benefits the most from the "you had to actually watch him" argument above Messier).

Messier's an all-time great, but you're significantly underselling the rest of the folks on your list above (including "et cetera").

 

[crobro]

Messier Dryden Beliveau Richard Bobby Hull

all have a an argument for 5th best

 

[Doctor No]

For Dryden to be the fifth best, he'd have to be the best goaltender. I've seen arguments for that, but I find them hard to carry water.

 

[jigglysquishy]

In terms of quality arguments I've seen here there are quite a few players in contention for 5th overall:

Goalies
Hasek - if you highly value high regular season peak and do not value Roy's adjusted RS stats
Roy - if you highly value playoff peak and do not value RS peak
Plante - if you value winning above all and respect his insane longevity (though not prime longevity)

Defenseman
Harvey - if you think he stirred the drink of the 50s Habs and his high prime
Bourque- best prime longevity in the sport besides Howe and nearly won a Hart
Lidstrom- longevity, prime, success. Really everything except a high peak
Shore- if you read too much into his Hart trophies he has a Big Four peak

Forward
Beliveau- high peak, long prime, won everything. His lack of RS awards is likely what stops him being the consensus 5th
Hull - arguably the highest offensive peak outside the Big Four
Crosby- arguably the best player born between 1973 and 1997, high peak, still in his prime, best trophy case of anyone post Lemieux
Richard - playoff warrior, 50 in 50, most culturally important hockey player of all time
Morenz - high peak, died from hockey injury, considered the best player pre 1950
Jagr - 5 Art Rosses, high peak, elite seasons 15 years apart, and still playing in his late 40s

If I take an honest look, I don't think everyone has a good case for 5th.

Beliveau and Hull are definitely the favorites, with Crosby, Hasek/Roy, Richard, and Harvey having great arguments too.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Crosby could "Howe" his way to #5, the same Howe "Howe'd" his way to higher than #4 of the Big 4.

Crosby doesnt have the peak or individual trophy case to "Howe" his way to anything. Connor McDavid already has as many Harts, Ross, Pearsons and AS-1s as Crosby

 

[jigglysquishy]

If McDavid repeats next year he'll enter the conversation. His Art Ross this year is the highest VsX score outside the Big Four and Esposito.

He would have point finishes of 1,1,1,1,2,2. That's a bit behind Jagr so probably still premature. And with no playoff success it's a hard argument to make. But impressive as hell for a 25 year old.

 

[Overrated]

In terms of quality arguments I've seen here there are quite a few players in contention for 5th overall:

Goalies
Hasek - if you highly value high regular season peak and do not value Roy's adjusted RS stats
Roy - if you highly value playoff peak and do not value RS peak
Plante - if you value winning above all and respect his insane longevity (though not prime longevity)

Defenseman
Harvey - if you think he stirred the drink of the 50s Habs and his high prime
Bourque- best prime longevity in the sport besides Howe and nearly won a Hart
Lidstrom- longevity, prime, success. Really everything except a high peak
Shore- if you read too much into his Hart trophies he has a Big Four peak

Forward
Beliveau- high peak, long prime, won everything. His lack of RS awards is likely what stops him being the consensus 5th
Hull - arguably the highest offensive peak outside the Big Four
Crosby- arguably the best player born between 1973 and 1997, high peak, still in his prime, best trophy case of anyone post Lemieux
Richard - playoff warrior, 50 in 50, most culturally important hockey player of all time
Morenz - high peak, died from hockey injury, considered the best player pre 1950
Jagr - 5 Art Rosses, high peak, elite seasons 15 years apart, and still playing in his late 40s

If I take an honest look, I don't think everyone has a good case for 5th.

Beliveau and Hull are definitely the favorites, with Crosby, Hasek/Roy, Richard, and Harvey having great arguments too.

Fetisov should also be in considered to be among the best d-men in history. Very high peak, high longevity, won everything there to be won. Everything in the Soviet league, 2 Olympic golds (against relatively weak opposition), 7 WC golds (against pretty good opposition even the Canadians who notoriously underrate the WC should see that throughout the 80s every single Canada lineup had several HOFs + strong Swedish/Czech lineups too. Won a Canada Cup too. While in his 30s he entered the NHL and even managed to win 2 Stanley cups. Overall the greatest Russian player of all time

Still not good enough to be in the top5 ever though overall likely had a more impressive career than any other d-man other than Orr.

 

[daver]

Crosby doesnt have the peak or individual trophy case to "Howe" his way to anything. Connor McDavid already has as many Harts, Ross, Pearsons and AS-1s as Crosby

Who are your #5 picks then? Beliveau must not be close I guess.

 

[Czech Your Math]

Peak Jagr won the Olympics and was named the all-star in the World Championships he won in 2005. I know there are NHL purists who insist those tournaments don't count but they are a big deal at least in Europe and the Olympics were a big deal everywhere if I remember correctly.

He also led the playoffs in even strength goals & points, having turned 20 earlier that year, and along with Francis was one of the two main reasons they got past the #1 seed Rangers in '92. Plenty of international performance/success on underdog teams too, as you alluded to (the '05 WC being a best on best due to lockout, although some big stars didn't play).

Not saying that he's the 5th greatest player in history, but if the games mattered, I'd take Messier over any of the names mentioned -- Beliveau, Hull, Hasek, Jagr, Bourque, Ovechkin, etc.

You can't deny Messier winning Cups w/o Gretzky, but not vice versa. He was also quite strong when looking at how team performed with vs. without him (along with Lemieux & Jagr).
I have more respect for Mess now than I once did.

I dunno, I do actually think that a fairly high Hart finish is a lot stronger of a look than not having a fairly high Hart finish.

If nothing else, it avoids a potential negative that could drop him out of the conversation entirely. Look at what Crosby did at age 33, then look at what Morenz did at age 33.

Then look at what Jagr did at 33+

Not all finishes, and esp. voting placements, are equal either. Jagr got 4th in Hart voting while setting the record for points & assists by a wing, while outscoring everybody by 19+ at ES (and everyone but Lemieux by 29 points overall).

In terms of quality arguments I've seen here there are quite a few players in contention for 5th overall:

Goalies
Hasek - if you highly value high regular season peak and do not value Roy's adjusted RS stats
Roy - if you highly value playoff peak and do not value RS peak
Plante - if you value winning above all and respect his insane longevity (though not prime longevity)

Defenseman
Harvey - if you think he stirred the drink of the 50s Habs and his high prime
Bourque- best prime longevity in the sport besides Howe and nearly won a Hart
Lidstrom- longevity, prime, success. Really everything except a high peak
Shore- if you read too much into his Hart trophies he has a Big Four peak

Forward
Beliveau- high peak, long prime, won everything. His lack of RS awards is likely what stops him being the consensus 5th
Hull - arguably the highest offensive peak outside the Big Four
Crosby- arguably the best player born between 1973 and 1997, high peak, still in his prime, best trophy case of anyone post Lemieux
Richard - playoff warrior, 50 in 50, most culturally important hockey player of all time
Morenz - high peak, died from hockey injury, considered the best player pre 1950
Jagr - 5 Art Rosses, high peak, elite seasons 15 years apart, and still playing in his late 40s

If I take an honest look, I don't think everyone has a good case for 5th.

Beliveau and Hull are definitely the favorites, with Crosby, Hasek/Roy, Richard, and Harvey having great arguments too.

I don't really understand how Hull had a higher offensive peak than Jagr, nor why he has a clearly stronger case. I guess if you value goals especially highly I can maybe see it, but that's overlooking that Jagr wasn't trying to maximize goals and was still one of the best goal-scorers ever. To me, it's pretty close, but I think Jagr's offensive versatility and unparalleled possession game give him the edge.

I understand the argument for Crosby, but don't really agree with it: Jagr was better offensively (peak/prime/career), has clearly stronger ES numbers (ES scoring, adj. plus-minus) over those same timeframes, and the same in the playoffs (Crosby narrows gap in offense, but Jagr widens gap in plus-minus data). So the only edge for Crosby is in team success and (quite correlated) more longer runs in playoff prime, which has more to do with circumstance than anything.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

He also led the playoffs in even strength goals & points, having turned 20 earlier that year, and along with Francis was one of the two main reasons they got past the #1 seed Rangers in '92. Plenty of international performance/success on underdog teams too, as you alluded to (the '05 WC being a best on best due to lockout, although some big stars didn't play).



You can't deny Messier winning Cups w/o Gretzky, but not vice versa. He was also quite strong when looking at how team performed with vs. without him (along with Lemieux & Jagr).
I have more respect for Mess now than I once did.



Then look at what Jagr did at 33+

Not all finishes, and esp. voting placements, are equal either. Jagr got 4th in Hart voting while setting the record for points & assists by a wing, while outscoring everybody by 19+ at ES (and everyone but Lemieux by 29 points overall).



I don't really understand how Hull had a higher offensive peak than Jagr, nor why he has a clearly stronger case. I guess if you value goals especially highly I can maybe see it, but that's overlooking that Jagr wasn't trying to maximize goals and was still one of the best goal-scorers ever. To me, it's pretty close, but I think Jagr's offensive versatility and unparalleled possession game give him the edge.

I understand the argument for Crosby, but don't really agree with it: Jagr was better offensively (peak/prime/career), has clearly stronger ES numbers (ES scoring, adj. plus-minus) over those same timeframes, and the same in the playoffs (Crosby narrows gap in offense, but Jagr widens gap in plus-minus data). So the only edge for Crosby is in team success and (quite correlated) more longer runs in playoff prime, which has more to do with circumstance than anything.

Not to mention everything else crosby brings to the game that jagr doesn't

 

[Professor What]

In terms of quality arguments I've seen here there are quite a few players in contention for 5th overall:

Goalies
Hasek - if you highly value high regular season peak and do not value Roy's adjusted RS stats
Roy - if you highly value playoff peak and do not value RS peak
Plante - if you value winning above all and respect his insane longevity (though not prime longevity)

Defenseman
Harvey - if you think he stirred the drink of the 50s Habs and his high prime
Bourque- best prime longevity in the sport besides Howe and nearly won a Hart
Lidstrom- longevity, prime, success. Really everything except a high peak
Shore- if you read too much into his Hart trophies he has a Big Four peak

Forward
Beliveau- high peak, long prime, won everything. His lack of RS awards is likely what stops him being the consensus 5th
Hull - arguably the highest offensive peak outside the Big Four
Crosby- arguably the best player born between 1973 and 1997, high peak, still in his prime, best trophy case of anyone post Lemieux
Richard - playoff warrior, 50 in 50, most culturally important hockey player of all time
Morenz - high peak, died from hockey injury, considered the best player pre 1950
Jagr - 5 Art Rosses, high peak, elite seasons 15 years apart, and still playing in his late 40s

If I take an honest look, I don't think everyone has a good case for 5th.

Beliveau and Hull are definitely the favorites, with Crosby, Hasek/Roy, Richard, and Harvey having great arguments too.

I pretty much agree with your list and assessment, though I think Ovechkin needs to be added too. He's another of those players that I think has a weaker argument for fifth, but I also think has one of the weaker arguments to bottom out among the group too. To me, the biggest point in Hull's favor is the argument that he's the greatest goal scorer ever, and Ovechkin is very much in the thick of that too, and, I'd argue he's passed Hull there. We might have finally seen him start to trail off this past season, but to remain a legit 50-goal scorer as long as he has is incredible -- only Covid prevented it last year.

While posting this, I also want to acknowledge that my views on how some of these players should be ranked has been shaken up a good bit in the last few months. I'm not sure how much that says about what I've learned, how much it says about my tendency to be indecisive at times, and how much it says about how close a lot of them are, but while the first two are factors, I think the third one is key.