Art Ross: McDavid or the field?

[McFlyingV]

Just barely buddy. Crosby needed 11 points in 7 games to win the ross. Very doable. And MacKinnon was like 0.1 ppg behind.

Shoulda coulda woulda

 

[Future GOAT]

Not to mention injuries helped Mcdavid a lot. Crosby/MacKinnon

Or you can look at it as McDavid's constitution helped him a lot. Being able to stay healthy is an attribute. Those guys were weak and couldn't hang with the big dog. Also, as the other poster pointed out winning the PPG race while playing a full 82 against guys with a skewed advantage is a lot better than you'd want to admit.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

McDavid also played 10+ of those games as a shell of himself which probably hurt his production in terms of PPG.

 

[NeverForget06]

Team Powerplay (league rankings) success from past Art Ross winners post 04/05

Thornton (12TH PP%, 11TH PP goals)

Crosby (5TH PP%, 1ST PP goals)

Ovechkin (9TH PP%, 8TH PP goals)

Malkin (20TH PP%, 17TH PP goals)

H. Sedin (4TH PP%, 3RD PP goals)

D. Sedin (1ST PP%, 1ST PP goals)

Malkin (5TH PP%, 4TH PP goals)

MSL (13TH PP%, 11TH PP goals)

Crosby (1ST PP%, 2ND PP goals)

Benn (12TH PP%, 5TH PP goals)

Kane (2ND PP%, 3RD PP goals)

McDavid (5TH PP%, 6TH PP goals)

McDavid (31ST PP%, 31ST PP goals)

This is why what McDavid did last year was so incredible. If the Oilers can get their powerplay back on track and he can stay healthy and not catch the plague he will win the Art Ross again, no doubt in my mind.

 

[daver]

Shoulda coulda woulda

Is this directed towards the posters saying McDavid Shoulda coulda woulda had more points last year if he didn't get sick, the PP didn't suck, the team was better etc....?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Oh man imaginary McDavid is infringing on imaginary Crosby's turf.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Oh man imaginary McDavid is infringing on imaginary Crosby's turf.

Yes but soon imaginary Matthews will become more powerful than you could ever imagine.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Oh man imaginary McDavid is infringing on imaginary Crosby's turf.

You still upset that Crosby is universally accepted as the best player of his generation and top 10 all time?

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Yes but soon imaginary Matthews will become more powerful than you could ever imagine.

Did....did you try to use a burner account or something here? Lol

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

Yes but soon imaginary Matthews will become more powerful than you could ever imagine.

 

[DEVILS130]

If McDavid is healthy there's no doubt in my mind he wins the Art Ross

 

[Midnight Judges]

I seem to have struck a not-so-imaginary nerve.

 

[McFlyingV]

Is this directed towards the posters saying McDavid Shoulda coulda woulda had more points last year if he didn't get sick, the PP didn't suck, the team was better etc....?

Nah its directed at all the tears in here over McDavid's back to back Art Ross trophies. I can't imagine what they will be like when he three-peats.

 

[daver]

Nah its directed at all the tears in here over McDavid's back to back Art Ross trophies. I can't imagine what they will be like when he three-peats.

Pointing out that McDavid did not really separate himself PPG-wise in either season is pretty reasonable. A few missed games by McDavid or better luck with injuries for a few others could have lead to a different outcome in the last two years.

 

[McFlyingV]

Pointing out that McDavid did not really separate himself PPG-wise in either season is pretty reasonable. A few missed games by McDavid or better luck with injuries for a few others could have lead to a different outcome in the last two years.

On the flip side the same applies to McDavid. Better luck, better PP, or no flu could have lead to a bigger gap for McDavid. Can't have it one way, but not the other.

 

[daver]

On the flip side the same applies to McDavid. Better luck, better PP, or no flu could have lead to a bigger gap for McDavid. Can't have it one way, but not the other.

This is a different context than a player missing games. It is not unreasonable to compare the PPGs of players who played almost the same number of games (within 10%). Speculation that a player would have scored more in the games they did play if circumstances were different is not the same as viewing the PPG of someone who played 74 games as being representative of their quality of play.

Assuming everyone plays 82 games this year, it is not unreasonable to think that someone from the field could win the Art Ross based on how things played out the last two years. It is also not unreasonable to think that McDavid improves and creates a bigger gap.

 

[Kuz]

Depends, if Edmonton has a decent PP this year theres no doubt that he will win. He just dominated 5vs5 last year with 84 even strength points. Last time anyone had more was Jagr in the 95/96 season and the closest after that is H. Sedin with 83 in 09/10. Of active players the closest are Malkin and Ovi who had 75 one season. McDavid in the shape he was last season and a functioning powerplay would have got to 120. If the PP is as bad as last year tough he dont have much to go on to the rest as his 5vs5 play has been so dominant it will be hard to improve.

 

[McFlyingV]

This is a different context than a player missing games. It is not unreasonable to compare the PPGs of players who played almost the same number of games (within 10%). Speculation that a player would have scored more in the games they did play if circumstances were different is not the same as viewing the PPG of someone who played 74 games as being representative of their quality of play.

Assuming everyone plays 82 games this year, it is not unreasonable to think that someone from the field could win the Art Ross based on how things played out the last two years. It is also not unreasonable to think that McDavid improves and creates a bigger gap.

It is unreasonable to speculate that a player would have increased their PPG if they had played more games. Its far easier to skew a higher PPG with less games played, than it is over 82 games.

I agree with your last points though. Any top player could win on any given year depending on players having career or down years. I just don't personally believe that will happen if McDavid plays all 82.

 

[daver]

It is unreasonable to speculate that a player would have increased their PPG if they had played more games. Its far easier to skew a higher PPG with less games played, than it is over 82 games.

I agree with your last points though. Any top player could win on any given year depending on players having career or down years. I just don't personally believe that will happen if McDavid plays all 82.

My point was a PPG after 70 plus games should be viewed as reasonable representation of their level of play. Based on this McDavid has not clearly separated himself yet from the rest of the league.

 

[North Cole]

If both Crosby and mackinnoN played full seasons like Mcdavid the gap would have been 3 and 1 point based on ppg. Each played 75 and 74 games which is a more than big enough sample size. Mcdavid may have still won both but it be damn damn close and could of went either way

He would have won both, as shown by the PPG. You can't just keep making the sample size smaller. You're basically taking an already speculative stat - that he would not only sustain his 70 game PPG - but then making it more speculative. If it was an 81 game ppg, would he also increase it in the last game by scoring 5 points? This is why PPG is such a slippery slope.

If it's a big enough sample size to indicate their 82 game production very closely, then how is there room to keep improving in the remaining 10, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 games? Mathematically unlikely.

 

[Laineux]

Pointing out that the Oilers horrid PP is unlikely to continue while McDavid's ES production seems sustainable is not giving him imaginary credit, it's acknowledging all the factors that go into play in trying to predict who wins the Art Ross next year.

Pointing out that MacKinnon's metrics behind his production appear unsustainable is also not taking credit away from his season, it is trying to predict the future by taking into account all the different variables.

 

[daver]

He would have won both, as shown by the PPG. You can't just keep making the sample size smaller. You're basically taking an already speculative stat - that he would not only sustain his 70 game PPG - but then making it more speculative. If it was an 81 game ppg, would he also increase it in the last game by scoring 5 points? This is why PPG is such a slippery slope.

If it's a big enough sample size to indicate their 82 game production very closely, then how is there room to keep improving in the remaining 10, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 games? Mathematically unlikely.

Who is arguing that he would have lost his Art Rosses?

 

[Varan]

McDavid also played 10+ of those games as a shell of himself which probably hurt his production in terms of PPG.

didn't you know? you can't use excuses for CM

anything that prevents higher point totals or PPG is only reserved for SC87

 

[Varan]

You still upset that Crosby is universally accepted as the best player of his generation and top 10 all time?

you're seriously comparing someone who has played 13 seasons and has won practically everything in hockey to a guy who is entering just his 4th season?

this post reeks of insecurity

 

[Thenameless]

I'd usually pick the field because of injury risk, but I'll have more fun picking McDavid in this fight. It would be cool to see another dominant Art Ross/Hart guy for the next decade.