Plural
Registered User
- Mar 10, 2011
- 33,708
- 4,858
Considering the strengths of some of those teams, that's superbly impressive to me.
Big 4: 2 Questions
- Thread starter Asheville
- Start date
Considering the strengths of some of those teams, that's superbly impressive to me.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,743
- 16,132
To be fair, the Wings made the Finals eleven times in Howe's career, Crosby made the finals four times. That gave Howe seven more opportunities to lead the league in scoring. In the three finals Crosby has not lead his team in scoring, he:
- put up the 2nd highest playoff point total in the last 21 seasons
- won the Conn Smythe in 2016
- won the Conn Smythe while finishing 2nd in scoring after suffering a concussion
Not saying that Crosby has been better than Howe in the playoffs, or that that makes much difference in an overall ranking but their respective playoff resumes are much closer than your comment would lead us to believe.
The Panther
Registered User
Not really. The fact is: Howe twice led the Wings in scoring when the Wings won the Cup.
Crosby has never led the Pens in scoring when the Pens have won the Cup (albeit he was close last year).
It's not a knock on Crosby, because obviously his team is getting it done, which is the main thing, and he's a big contributor -- full marks. But for the "He's-the-5th-greatest-player-of-all-time!!" crowd, shouldn't the 5th-greatest player (the highest-scoring forward of his era, at that) be able to lead the team in scoring, when they win, just once in three or more tries? I'm criticizing the Crosby-ites, not Crosby himself.
Yes. That is a bit underwhelming. But it's also not the end of the world.
Gretzky and Lemieux's success is all about points. Had they not led their teams in point it would have been a huge knock on them.
Crosby is a bit more like Beliveau. (i'd even argue there's more of a 1a/1b with Crosby/Malkin then there was in Beliveau's time, for many years). Beliveau won 10 cups but only once led his team in scoring in playoffs. He's still seen as a legit top 5 playoff performer of all time, give or take. And Beliveau is often hailed as the most likely #5 player of all time.
I don't think it's fair to obsess over one specific component (such as not leading your team in scoring in playoffs the year your teams won the cup) and to use that as a reason to exclude a player from a certain ranking (5th all time) - if common sense dictates that the resume itself is still strong enough to be worthy. And it is, for Crosby. In all his cup wins he was 2nd in scoring - and arguably still the "best" player (maybe not 09). 2 points more or less doesn't really diminish the strength of his overall resume.
Just as I can argue Beliveau > Howe for playoffs despite Beliveau not often leading his teams in playoff scoring - I think it would be ok to argue so about Crosby (whether today or at the end of his career if he ever is worthy of passing Howe for playoffs).
Fact is: he has been deemed the biggest contributor twice in their three Cup runs so perhaps a broader, less strawman-themed look beyond raw point totals is needed.
And out of curiosity, where would you rate his 31 point, 15 goal performance in his era? Or matched up against Howe's five leading point efforts?
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,070
- 12,723
There seems to be a rather large gap between "Crosby isn't a reasonable competitor for Gretzky/Howe/Lemieux/Orr" and "Crosby basically sucks" but it seems that some cannot see it. The standard to to match those four is so high that even Crosby doesn't reach it, regular season or playoffs. That isn't a slight on him, it's just reality.
I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing Crosby is in the big 4 tier, or will reach it.
I know I said it's possible - but i'm just being literal. It's possible. Less than a .01% chance it happens, but it is possible.
I know this forum frowns on speculation but if Crosby:
(1) maintains his place at the top of the league, which most seem to think he has been at since 2006, for a period longer than Howe did (from 50/51 to 63/64) and
(2) betters Howe's playoff legacy, which would be mean also bettering Mario and Orr's
Doesn't that at least present an argument for him to be, at worst, closer to the Big 4 than he is to any non-Big 4 player?
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,070
- 12,723
Neither of those things is realistic, though I don't quite understand why you cut off Howe at 1964. I would also say that doing those things would be pretty similar to what Beliveau did, with different weight on the different pieces. Crosby doesn't have the peak to match the big four, and the chances that he suddenly fixes that in his thirties are incredibly low. He may end up at number five, but that's a very different thing. The focus for Crosby fans should be on passing Jagr, Beliveau, Hull etc. and not on players that are out of reach.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
first off, Howe's dominance started in 49-50, and runs to 69-70...thats 20 straight seasons top 10 in points and 12x AS-1, 9x AS-2.
Problem too is even without the crazy length of dominance, Howe's peak is better than Crosby's.
Harts: 6x vs 2x
Ross: 6x vs 2x
Rocket: 5x vs 2x
Assists: 3x vs 1x
playoffs: 6x led in league scoring vs 1x led league in scoring
The Panther
Registered User
I am referring the the Best Player of the World thread.
Crosby has been listed on that since 2006/07 until last year. Howe was listed from 50/51 to 62/63 ( I would put him there until 63/64 myself). After that, Howe was not viewed as being the very best but was still impressively keeping himself close to the top. Crosby staying at the very top for three or four more years is, IMO, not unrealistic given his age. If he does that, then he should become the unanimous #5 player and perhaps starts to create an argument to make it a Big 5.
Just as realistic, perhaps even more, is a better playoff resume than Orr and Mario, and even Howe. Again, he age 30.
Using the same metrics and evaluation that placed Howe at the top from 50/51 to 62/63 or 63/64.
How was he dominant after 63/64?
And I am not saying he can ever surpass Howe but if he has achievements that surpass one or more members of the Big Four (i.e. playoff resume, length of prime) doesn't that at least present an argument for him to make it a Big 5?
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
64-65 to 68-69:
goals: 3, 7, 7, 3, 5
assists: 2, 4, 6, 8, 3
points: 3, 4, 4, 5, 3
hart voting: 3, 3, 7, 5, 5
3x AS-1
2x AS-2
69-70 was the end of the run...top 10 in points, but not in points or assists, still snagged a AS-1 and 6th in Hart voting though.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
Problem too is Crosby does not have the best argument for making the Big 5.
guys like Hasek, Bourque, Harvey, Jagr, Bobby Hull, Mikita all have better (varying degrees) cases as #5 than Crosby does. Which is no knock on Crosby. It's a hell of an accomplishment to get into the top 10 convo
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,070
- 12,723
This is more wishful thinking than a realistic take on Crosby's chances. Crosby isn't the best player in hockey anymore and just like everyone else is very unlikely to match Howe's longevity. It's quite possible that despite a pretty healthy year he won't finish top ten in scoring this year. Barring an unexpected upturn he won't match Howe in the playoffs, and any case he has against Orr and Lemieux in the playoffs would pretty much come down to longevity more than actual level of play.
Again, Crosby fans should be far more worried about him passing Beliveau, Jagr and Hull than about him joining Gretzky/Orr/Howe/Lemieux.The case for Crosby to join those guys requires a ton of dancing, twisting and selective omissions. That isn't true of the case for any of Gretzky, Howe, Orr or Lemieux, which is why those four are generally considered clearly above everyone else. If Crosby isn't clearly above Beliveau, Jagr or Hull, and he isn't, then there is no need to worry about how he stacks up against the big four.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
When is the last time Crosby was considered the best player in the world?
Crosby has arguably the best career by age 30/thru his 1st 12 seasons outside of the Big 4. That's puts him in the #5 player conversation albeit to that extent.
From 2006 to last season, according to HOH
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/best-player-in-the-world.973915/
Sentinel
Registered User
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,070
- 12,723
I don't know exactly, you're the one throwing that claim around. I do know that Crosby didn't reach Howe's peak and that Howe was in consideration for best player for as long as Crosby's career has been thus far, and Howe even played almost a full season every year over that span. There is no point comparing Crosby's first 13 years to Howe's first 13 years, and it is very unlikely that Crosby's next 7-8 will match Howe's. Comparing Crosby to Beliveau, Hull and Jagr is far more reasonable.
