Connor McDavid will go down as the 2nd best player of all-time

[blankall]

So which one is it, blank?

I was responding to a poster that said McDavid was still getting better and there was an upward trend in his play the last two years. That doesn't appear to be the case.

The more likely scenario is that he's peaked, and his numbers will get worse as he gets older. That's likely masked by scoring going up generally. Hence why almost all the other players in the top ten have seen their numbers go up and why we now have dozens of players with 80 plus points. For example, Panarin likely didn't get suddenly better at 32.

 

[blankall]

You're wasting your breath fingers. Some people in this thread don't care that Howe won 6 scoring titles in 25 NHL seasons against talent from only 4 Canadian provinces whereas McDavid has 5 in 8 seasons and maybe 6 in 9 two weeks from now in an era where scoring titles are being won by Czechs, Americans, Russians, Germans, and Swedes. McDavid apparently can never match Howe's dominance over his peers. Make it make sense.

Howe played until very late, winning his Art Ross trophies early in his career. You cite him playing for 25 years and having incredible longevity like it's a bad thing. He, like all players, was not as good as he aged. If anything this just illustrates why comparing the career averages of McDavid, who is still in his prime, and the greats, who went through declines, is faulty.

 

[Rebels57]

He's not passing Lemieux or Orr without winning at least 1 Cup.

 

[Soundwave]

I was responding to a poster that said McDavid was still getting better and there was an upward trend in his play the last two years. That doesn't appear to be the case.

The more likely scenario is that he's peaked, and his numbers will get worse as he gets older. That's likely masked by scoring going up generally. Hence why almost all the other players in the top ten have seen their numbers go up and why we now have dozens of players with 80 plus points. For example, Panarin likely didn't get suddenly better at 32.

He has a 144+ point pace this year with his second worst shooting percentage. That would be his 2nd best season, shouldn’t be possible in a poor shooting season but here we are.

He was clearly injured for a good 3-4 weeks this year too. Otherwise it’s probably another 150 plus point season.

If anything the older Kucherov (and MacKinnon) hitting career peaks show McDavid has significant run way left still.

 

[HFpapi]

He's not passing Lemieux or Orr without winning at least 1 Cup.

Yeah I don't like the championships = everything arguments but I do agree with this. He does need to win at least 1.

32 team league, I get it, "33 points in a playoff, how much more can he be expected to do," I get it. It's just a matter of fact that almost every single all-time great in every single sport managed to win a championship at some point.

 

[Toby91ca]

He has a 144+ point pace this year with his second worst shooting percentage. That would be his 2nd best season, shouldn’t be possible in a poor shooting season but here we are.

He has 29 goals this year vs. 64 last year....perhaps that is due to second worst shooting percentage of his career. Shooting percentages do not really have a correlation to how many points a player scores....goals yes, to an extent, but not really points.

 

[daver]

He has a 144+ point pace this year with his second worst shooting percentage. That would be his 2nd best season, shouldn’t be possible in a poor shooting season but here we are.

He was clearly injured for a good 3-4 weeks this year too. Otherwise it’s probably another 150 plus point season.

If anything the older Kucherov (and MacKinnon) hitting career peaks show McDavid has significant run way left still.

If injuries are supposed to be considered, then Orr and Mario are unpassable and Crosby would be the clear #5 player.

 

[AUAIOMRN]

Gretzky/Orr/Lemieux are just too far ahead of everyone else; I don't think McDavid (or maybe anyone) can really do anything to get above them. The game has matured to the point where it's just too hard to be that much better than the rest of the league. What he could become, though, is the clear-cut "best of the rest" - the guy locked in the #4 spot while the next few spots are debatable.

 

[LudwigVonKarlsson]

Only a boomer would say this. Lemme guess, you think Cyclone Taylor had the silkiest hands of all time?

McDavid is obviously better than Howe in a vacuum i.e actual hockey ability to the point it's really not even fair to Howe to compare so let's leave that aside.

McDavid has a better than good chance to tie Howe for Art Ross and Hart trophies after only 9 seasons at the age of 27. Gordie did 6 scoring titles in 25 years against a league that never saw a single Russian, Swede, Czech, Fin, German, and barely any Americans either for that matter.

McDavid has three era-adjusted offensive seasons better than Howe's best.

On what basis can McDavid *NEVER* pass Howe?

Until he wins at least one cup, he won't pass Howe.

 

[HFpapi]

Until he wins at least one cup, he won't pass Howe.

I've agreed with this point.

My thread title says "WILL" finish 2nd to be a bit provocative but more accurately I mean "CAN" finish 2nd which a lot of people clearly still disagree with.

For McDavid to finish 2nd he has work to do. These are the 4 things I think McDavid needs to do to finish 2nd. (All of these are very much possible for him but none are a given at the same time).

1) Win 3 more scoring titles (including this year) bringing him to 8.
2) Win 2 more Harts (including this year) bringing him to 5
3) score 2000 points
4) Win at least 1 cup

 

[Suntouchable13]

Yeah I don't like the championships = everything arguments but I do agree with this. He does need to win at least 1.

32 team league, I get it, "33 points in a playoff, how much more can he be expected to do," I get it. It's just a matter of fact that almost every single all-time great in every single sport managed to win a championship at some point.

This one is tough for me. I get it, a lot of all time greats have won at least one cup but right now with parity being the way it is, and the strict salary cap, I think some great players will go cupless. And it’s nothing to do with them.

 

[jigglysquishy]

You're wasting your breath fingers. Some people in this thread don't care that Howe won 6 scoring titles in 25 NHL seasons against talent from only 4 Canadian provinces whereas McDavid has 5 in 8 seasons and maybe 6 in 9 two weeks from now in an era where scoring titles are being won by Czechs, Americans, Russians, Germans, and Swedes. McDavid apparently can never match Howe's dominance over his peers. Make it make sense.

You're not arguing Howe vs McDavid.

You're arguing your ignorant version of Howe, which misses basic facts, vs. McDavid.

Howe can't win for you because you don't know anything about Howe. You've consistently got facts wrong, which shows you don't know anything about the player.

He's not a player in your mind but a two-sentence Wikipedia article. Assuming he has 4, not 6 Harts, isn't even a Wikipedia article. It's a never-even-bothered, type effort. He's a consensus top four player of all-time. If you can't even give him the respect of a 30 second Wikipedia read, why even bring him up?

The Athletic knew they were ignorant of pre-1967 hockey, so when they did their top 100 in 2023 they started in 1967. There's no shame in admitting ignorance and starting with a year you're comfortable with. The main forum would be a lot better if people did "best player since year X" instead of pretending it's an all-time list while ignoring everything pre 1910/1927/1942/1967/1980/1993/2005. There's a boatload of hockey history and it's not reasonable to expect people to know everything.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Why are people crediting McDavid for getting the stats he has in a "harder league" yet also docking him on not winning a Cup when it's exactly that much harder to do

 

[WalterLundy]

I've agreed with this point.

My thread title says "WILL" finish 2nd to be a bit provocative but more accurately I mean "CAN" finish 2nd which a lot of people clearly still disagree with.

For McDavid to finish 2nd he has work to do. These are the 4 things I think McDavid needs to do to finish 2nd. (All of these are very much possible for him but none are a given at the same time).

1) Win 3 more scoring titles (including this year) bringing him to 8.
2) Win 2 more Harts (including this year) bringing him to 5
3) score 2000 points
4) Win at least 1 cup

This hits the nail on the head. If he does that (which I believe is very possible) then he would have the second best career ever I think. People also need to understand that Orr and Lemieux are surpassable for career because of missed time even if their peaks will always be higher than McDavid (with McDavid still having a top 5 peak ever). I confess to not being a Howe expert but in my mind 5 Harts, 8 Ross, 2K points and a top 5 peak/prime would be enough with a cup to be second best ever Howe included.

 

[paracord]

Just a question: How would McDavid ever eclipse people like Lemieux or Gretzky when he's only been the league's best goal scorer one time? He's not even the best goal scorer on his own team in the prime of his career.

Gretzky and Lemieux went like a decade and a half of each being simultaneously the best goal scorer and playmaker in the world.

 

[Spirits]

32 team league, I get it, "33 points in a playoff, how much more can he be expected to do," I get it. It's just a matter of fact that almost every single all-time great in every single sport managed to win a championship at some point.

Yeah I don't like the championships = everything arguments

New to sports?

32 team league, I get it, "33 points in a playoff, how much more can he be expected to do," I get it. It's just a matter of fact that almost every single all-time great in every single sport managed to win a championship at some point.

He has to win one, in Edmonton, as the primary driver. Everyone before him did it, and everyone after will have to do it. Guy needs to commit to winning and demand that his teammates do as well. I don't see that from him, nor do I hear that about him.

 

[hockey20000]

he can have 2000 points but if he doesnt win 2 stanley cups minamum i have hard time putting him as 2nd best all time....

 

[cupface52]

Just a question: How would McDavid ever eclipse people like Lemieux or Gretzky when he's only been the league's best goal scorer one time? He's not even the best goal scorer on his own team in the prime of his career.

Gretzky and Lemieux went like a decade and a half of each being simultaneously the best goal scorer and playmaker in the world.

Not a single person is suggesting McDavid has even the slightest chance of eclipsing Gretzky. The big 4 isn't really the big 4, rather it's Gretzky and the big 3.

When was Lemieux the best anything for 15 years. He led the league in goal scoring 3 times. Did Lemieux have the talent and potential? Absolutely, but careers aren't based off of talent and potential. If you only want to look at talent and potential, Lafleur, Bossy, and Jagr would be bonafide top 10 players ranked #5,6,7.

In the Hockey world it's very rare for a player to be considered a top 5 player for a 5 year stretch, let alone the best during that time. McDavid has been a top 2 player for a stretch of what will be 8 years. His prime/peak has already eclipsed every single player except for Gretzky and the big 3.

 

[paracord]

Not a single person is suggesting McDavid has even the slightest chance of eclipsing Gretzky. The big 4 isn't really the big 4, rather it's Gretzky and the big 3.

When was Lemieux the best anything for 15 years. He led the league in goal scoring 3 times. Did Lemieux have the talent and potential? Absolutely, but careers aren't based off of talent and potential. If you only want to look at talent and potential, Lafleur, Bossy, and Jagr would be bonafide top 10 players ranked #5,6,7.

In the Hockey world it's very rare for a player to be considered a top 5 player for a 5 year stretch, let alone the best during that time. McDavid has been a top 2 player for a stretch of what will be 8 years. His prime/peak has already eclipsed every single player except for Gretzky and the big 3.

I very much disagree. Mario was the best goal scorer in the world from about 1987 until he retired the first time in 1997. He was also the best playmaker in that era as well, or he shared that with Gretzky. When he came back in 2000 he was probably top a top 3 goal scorer after not playing for 3 years and being 35 years old.

McDavid is for sure the best playmaker of his era, but he's second fiddle in goal scoring to guys like Mathews and Draisaitl and probably several others.

You're right that McDavid is not Gretzky, but he's also not Lemieux, therefore he will never be the second greatest player ever. Lemieux was a better offensive force and a much more dominant goal scorer than McDavid, while still being as good of a playmaker.

 

[crowfish]

I don't agree with the need for 1 cup because that is too simple of an analysis. The most important factor to me is performance.

I'll use an example:

Assume the Oilers lose in the Stanley Cup finals this year and McDavid had 45 points in 20 games +15. I would consider that a legendary performance (assuming he was also great in the finals)

Now on the flip side let's imagine the Oilers win the Cup this year and McDavid has 18 points in 20 games -2. I honestly think that is worse for his legacy. Most people can't wrap their minds around the fact that you can be great and lose and you can also be average and win.

 

[cupface52]

I very much disagree. Mario was the best goal scorer in the world from about 1987 until he retired the first time in 1997. He was also the best playmaker in that era as well, or he shared that with Gretzky. When he came back in 2000 he was probably top a top 3 goal scorer after not playing for 3 years and being 35 years old.

McDavid is for sure the best playmaker of his era, but he's second fiddle in goal scoring to guys like Mathews and Draisaitl and probably several others.

You're right that McDavid is not Gretzky, but he's also not Lemieux, therefore he will never be the second greatest player ever. Lemieux was a better offensive force and a much more dominant goal scorer than McDavid, while still being as good of a playmaker.

'87 could be argued so I'll give it to him. '88 and '89, Yes. '90-'92 that title belongs to Brett Hull as the best goal scorer during those 3 years. '93 yes. '94-95, he played 22 games one season, and missed a full season, so no. '96 yes. '97 would be Jagr.

You're accrediting Lemieux's talent and potential to his career. Would Lemieux easily have been the best player for a 10+ year stretch had he played full seasons, yes, but he didn't.

No, McDavid will not reach Lemieux's absolute peak. Will McDavid's overall body of work surpass Lemieux? Unknown, but it's ludicrous to say he has zero chance after what he's shown so far. 12 years as a top 2 player, another 5 as a top 5, imo would clearly surpass Lemieux.

 

[paracord]

'87 could be argued so I'll give it to him. '88 and '89, Yes. '90-'92 that title belongs to Brett Hull as the best goal scorer during those 3 years. '93 yes. '94-95, he played 22 games one season, and missed a full season, so no. '96 yes. '97 would be Jagr.

You're accrediting Lemieux's talent and potential to his career. Would Lemieux easily have been the best player for a 10+ year stretch had he played full seasons, yes, but he didn't.

No, McDavid will not reach Lemieux's absolute peak. Will McDavid's overall body of work surpass Lemieux? Unknown, but it's ludicrous to say he has zero chance after what he's shown so far. 12 years as a top 2 player, another 5 as a top 5, imo would clearly surpass Lemieux.

I was talking about talent though. McDavid is simply not the dual threat that Lemieux was. And in 1997 Mario had 50 goals. Jagr had 47. He led the league in scoring over a young Teemu Selanne by 13 points. Yes, obviously Lemieux had all kinds of health issues, but there was never a day in the 1990s where he wasn't the best goal scorer or play maker in the world, even when he was in the hospital getting radiation in the early 90s or sitting on his couch retired in the late 90s (as 2000 and 2001 proved). McDavid has never really held both of those titles, save for maybe last year, and he lost it again this year. He seems to trend much more heavily as a playmaker than as the league's dominant goal scorer.

It's a very rare bird that is the undisputed league's best goal scorer AND playmaker, like Lemieux and Gretzky were for years and years each. Even Crosby never reached that level with Ovechkin in his era.

I'm just talking about McDavid vs. Lemieux as all around offensive threats. They are equal or Lemieux surpasses him in playmaking, and Lemieux dominates him in goal scoring. I don't think McDavid has a chance to be #2 all time. He could possibly kick Crosby out of #5 all time if he wins a cup or two and stays healthy for a 16 to 20 year career.

 

[Coffey]

He's gonna have to pull a Bourque eventually.
Then that team can raise his jersey to the rafters too.

He seems to trend much more heavily as a playmaker than as the league's dominant goal scorer.

He stopped shooting completely this year. And it's pissed off the entire Oiler fanbase.

 

[cupface52]

I was talking about talent though. McDavid is simply not the dual threat that Lemieux was. And in 1997 Mario had 50 goals. Jagr had 47. He led the league in scoring over a young Teemu Selanne by 13 points. Yes, obviously Lemieux had all kinds of health issues, but there was never a day in the 1990s where he wasn't the best goal scorer or play maker in the world. McDavid has never really held both of those titles, save for maybe last year, and he lost it again this year. He seems to trend much more heavily as a playmaker than as the league's dominant goal scorer.

It's a very rare bird that is the undisputed league's best goal scorer AND playmaker, like Lemieux and Gretzky were for years and years each. Even Crosby never reached that level with Ovechkin in his era.

I'm just talking about McDavid vs. Lemieux as all around offensive threats. They are equal or Lemieux surpasses him in playmaking, and Lemieux dominates him in goal scoring. I don't think McDavid has a chance to be #2 all time. He could possibly kick Crosby out of #5 all time if he wins a cup or two and stays healthy for a 16 to 20 year career.

Selanne and Tkachuk scored more goals than Lemieux in '97, however Lemieux played less games. Yes, Lemieux scored 3 more goals than Jagr, in an extra 13 games. I gave Lemieux the benefit by taking into account gpg as well in previous years, and didn't just look at raw numbers. It was only fair I extended that curtesy to other players.

Which is more important, a players overall body of work, or their talent and potential when evaluating the top players. If you care more about talent, why is Crosby ahead of Jagr, Bossy, and Lafleur in your ranking.

If McDavid were to win the Art Ross, Cup, and Smythe this year, he's already surpassed Crosby, he won't need to wait another 7 years.

 

[TampaBayLightning]

why not the best that ever played?