Crosby current all time center ranking?

[MXD]

(And Crosby will definitely pass Yzerman unless he's currently playing his last season or something like that)

 

[seventieslord]

I agree with you, Crosby is a strong goalscoring center.But by the eye-test we know the second best goalscoring center is Malkin (right?), which makes him very impressive from that point of view.But Crosby is just behind.

Edit: Actually looking at the stats it's not even that clear that Malkin is better at scoring goals than Crosby, but I sure feel that way when I watch them.

Not sure I'd call Malkin better, he scores fewer goals per game and has done so over a smaller sample.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Not sure I'd call Malkin better, he scores fewer goals per game and has done so over a smaller sample.

Yeah I edited my post.I was so sure that I didn't even care to check the stats.My bad.

I'm surprised by this.

 

[seventieslord]

Yeah, I can't place him ahead of Stevie either. I just can't do it.

You haven't read all the way through yet. I can and do place him ahead of Yzerman after closer investigation.

 

[Boxscore]

Literally off the top of my head...

1. Gretzky
2. Lemieux
3. Beliveau
4. Messier
5. Morenz
6. Mikita
7. Forsberg
8. Clarke
9. Yzerman
10. Sakic
11. [CROSBY]
12. Esposito
13. Trottier
14. Apps
15. Malkin
16. Richard
17. Dionne

etc.

So, I'd say in the 10-14 range. I know I'm probably forgetting a couple great centermen.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Literally off the top of my head...

1. Gretzky
2. Lemieux
3. Beliveau
4. Messier
5. Morenz
6. Mikita
7. Forsberg
8. Clarke
9. Yzerman
10. Sakic
11. [CROSBY]
12. Esposito
13. Trottier
14. Apps
15. Malkin
16. Dionne
17. Richard

etc.

So, I'd say in the 10-14 range. I know I'm probably forgetting a couple great centermen.

Having Forsberg so high is a huge red flag in your list (same with Malkin).

Also missing some players like Taylor, Boucher, Lalonde, Nighbor, which are all ahead of Forsberg no matter how you look at it.

 

[Boxscore]

Having Forsberg so high is a huge red flag in your list.

I love Forsberg, admittedly more than others. At his best, he was probably the 3rd-4th most dominant center I've ever seen. I have a huge soft spot for him; one of my all-time favorite players. I think he was absolutely incredible. Forsberg isn't strictly a stat (paper) ranking for me; just like Clarke.

 

[bobholly39]

Playoffs.

Yzerman has an actual Connie Smythe.
Gilmour has 92-93, which is totally a Smythe-performance better than any Crosby performance and better than many actual Connie Smythes, including Yzerman's.

Highly subjective opinion. Not saying you're wrong, but:

Crosby's performances in both 08 and 09 compare very well to Yzerman's Conn Smythe year. If you're saying Gilmour without a smythe is better, you need to be willing to give Crosby a fair comparison too even "without" a smythe.

And Gilmour? I agree that his 92-93 playoff was pretty damn strong, but so were Crosby's 2 back to back years. If you want to put Gilmour ahead that's fine, but it's not like Crosby shouldn't be quite close.

Crosby's playoff "peak" is very strong. Maybe not Lemieux, Gretzky or Roy strong, but compared to Yzerman or Gilmour he certainly isn't lacking anything.

Guys like Jagr, or Ovechkin...well you could say that their overall playoff "prime" isn't bad because they have high stats over a large amount of games...yet are lacking a true elite playoff "peak". I could see such an argument for those players. But if you try to argue that for Crosby (which is what I think you were implying, right?)? Crosby actually had a pretty strong playoff peak. Certainly on the same level of Gilmour/Yzerman, regardless of which order you want to rank those 3 in.

 

[bobholly39]

Having Forsberg so high is a huge red flag in your list (same with Malkin).

Also missing some players like Taylor, Boucher, Lalonde, Nighbor, which are all ahead of Forsberg no matter how you look at it.

Malkin.

I'd love to hear more people's opinion on Malkin. I'm really stumped with where to rank him.

Crosby? Crosby is quite easy. There's a lot of discussion in this thread, but it's more about "where would Crosby be if he retired today". I think majority of posters agree that Crosby is easily pacing towards a top 5 center all-time for career if he ages reasonably ok.

But what about Malkin? How high will Malkin go? Is Malkin pacing to finish ahead of Sakic? Yzerman? Forsberg? Esposito? Messier? I have no idea. I feel as though Malkin for most of his prime got grouped with Crosby/Ovy as being top 3 player ahead of the rest of the NHL - very few centers on the all-time list could be said to have been an arguably top 3 player in the world for so long. That's gotta be worth something, right?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Malkin.

I'd love to hear more people's opinion on Malkin. I'm really stumped with where to rank him.

Crosby? Crosby is quite easy. There's a lot of discussion in this thread, but it's more about "where would Crosby be if he retired today". I think majority of posters agree that Crosby is easily pacing towards a top 5 center all-time for career if he ages reasonably ok.

But what about Malkin? How high will Malkin go? Is Malkin pacing to finish ahead of Sakic? Yzerman? Forsberg? Esposito? Messier? I have no idea. I feel as though Malkin for most of his prime got grouped with Crosby/Ovy as being top 3 player ahead of the rest of the NHL - very few centers on the all-time list could be said to have been an arguably top 3 player in the world for so long. That's gotta be worth something, right?

Malkin = Lindros

 

[Boxscore]

Malkin.

I'd love to hear more people's opinion on Malkin. I'm really stumped with where to rank him.

Not that I would rank him higher than Crosby right now, but when I watch them play, Malkin strikes me as the more dominant player, and I've thought this for a while. Malkin is another one that fits the "at his best" criteria for me; because at his best, Malkin absolutely wows me more than any player in the league today probably. He's just moody, fickle and gets injured too much.

I've followed Crosby and Malkin closely since day one and Crosby always screamed, "young Yzerman" to me and Malkin, "Mario-light".

 

[MXD]

Not that I would rank him higher than Crosby right now, but when I watch them play, Malkin strikes me as the more dominant player, and I've thought this for a while. Malkin is another one that fits the "at his best" criteria for me; because at his best, Malkin absolutely wows me more than any player in the league today probably. He's just moody, fickle and gets injured too much.

Malkin is also quite sheltered in the grand scheme of things. Or was at least

 

[MXD]

And come to think of it, I'm definitely taking Gilmour ahead of Crosby for playoff peak, if peak is defined by "two straight seasons".

I mean, we're talking about absolutely elite-level 2-way play (Selke 1, Selke 2) leading his team in scoring by an absolutely obscene margin two years in a row with a decent enough sample of games.

 

[seventieslord]

Malkin.

I'd love to hear more people's opinion on Malkin. I'm really stumped with where to rank him.

Crosby? Crosby is quite easy. There's a lot of discussion in this thread, but it's more about "where would Crosby be if he retired today". I think majority of posters agree that Crosby is easily pacing towards a top 5 center all-time for career if he ages reasonably ok.

But what about Malkin? How high will Malkin go? Is Malkin pacing to finish ahead of Sakic? Yzerman? Forsberg? Esposito? Messier? I have no idea. I feel as though Malkin for most of his prime got grouped with Crosby/Ovy as being top 3 player ahead of the rest of the NHL - very few centers on the all-time list could be said to have been an arguably top 3 player in the world for so long. That's gotta be worth something, right?

I think Malkin looks good right where he ended up on the HOH list. But in the end a Marcel Dionne-like career is probably a good estimate. Not as many high end regular seasons but stronger in the playoffs. Not much else to his game to put him higher.

 

[daver]

I've followed Crosby and Malkin closely since day one and Crosby always screamed, "young Yzerman" to me and Malkin, "Mario-light".

Figurative assessments aside, how can you continue to say this given Crosby has dominated the pack on PPG basis over his 11 seasons to a degree that only a handful players, let alone centres, have ever done?

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Crosby has a clearly longer peak/prime, how ever one chooses to define it. Sakic had as many seasons where he was in the pack as he had where he was at the ahead of the pack.

If Crosby is not ahead of the Sakic/Yzerman/Trottier tier at this point, another season or two of prime play should move him ahead.

Those seasons "in the pack" were still great seasons. Sakic and Yzerman were great players for 20 years. Crosby has been great for half the length of time. And his playoff resume lags well behind theirs, and certainly Trottier's, who was arguably the best player on one of the best dynasties. Crosby may pass them, but saying he has already is premature.

Adding more high point finishes is nice, but he really needs to do something in the playoffs again after a long string of disappointments. This is getting glossed over a little too easily in here for my liking.

 

[daver]

And come to think of it, I'm definitely taking Gilmour ahead of Crosby for playoff peak, if peak is defined by "two straight seasons".

I mean, we're talking about absolutely elite-level 2-way play (Selke 1, Selke 2) leading his team in scoring by an absolutely obscene margin two years in a row with a decent enough sample of games.

I think you have to look at individual runs as a player's peak. Two straight seasons is relying way too much on things that are out of a player's control.

Gilmour's '93 is legendary. Then Crosby's '09.

 

[daver]

Those seasons "in the pack" were still great seasons. Sakic and Yzerman were great players for 20 years. Crosby has been great for half the length of time. And his playoff resume lags well behind theirs, and certainly Trottier's, who was arguably the best player on one of the best dynasties. Crosby may pass them, but saying he has already is premature.

Adding more high point finishes is nice, but he really needs to do something in the playoffs again after a long string of disappointments. This is getting glossed over a little too easily in here for my liking.

I love Sakic and Yzerman and don't really have a strong opinion on who should be rated above who at this point.

I think it is quite clear he has been significantly better than Sakic and Yzerman on a per game basis after 11 seasons. At some point, this will trump total points, if it has not already.

His playoff resume at age 28 is lacking nothing in comparison to Sakic and Yzerman except total points. He has two Conn-Smythe worthy runs, is the leading point getter and the leader in PPG over his career.

Both Sakic and Yzerman had numerous playoff "disappointments" over their careers.

 

[Voight]

Crosby has a clearly longer peak/prime, how ever one chooses to define it. Sakic had as many seasons where he was in the pack as he had where he was at the ahead of the pack.

If Crosby is not ahead of the Sakic/Yzerman/Trottier tier at this point, another season or two of prime play should move him ahead.

Sakic had a much longer prime.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I love Sakic and Yzerman and don't really have a strong opinion on who should be rated above who at this point.

I think it is quite clear he has been significantly better than Sakic and Yzerman on a per game basis after 11 seasons. At some point, this will trump total points, if it has not already.

His playoff resume at age 28 is lacking nothing in comparison to Sakic and Yzerman except total points. He has two Conn-Smythe worthy runs, is the leading point getter and the leader in PPG over his career.

Both Sakic and Yzerman had numerous playoff "disappointments" over their careers.

Sakic had plenty of other runs that fell just short against the great Red Wings and Stars teams of the day. Outright disappointments/upsets were few and far between for Sakic. Yzerman had more, but still reached four finals and won three Cups.

Crosby has 08 and 09. That's pretty much it. Since they won the Cup, the Penguins have won just four total playoff series, and those have all come against weak opponents. Crosby needs to have some great series against some great teams before he gets to Sakic/Yzerman level, unless you only care about what a player did in their absolute peak seasons.

Being ahead of where Sakic and Yzerman were at the 11 season mark is nice, but those guys aged very well. Sakic had his best season in his 13th year. Yzerman won three Cups past season 11. Let's wait and see if Crosby has a similarly great stretch in his 30s before concluding he's left them in the dust.

 

[daver]

Sakic had a much longer prime.

So do many d-men in comparison to Orr.

How many more years of playing at a higher level than Sakic's prime will it take to surpass him?

 

[daver]

Sakic had plenty of other runs that fell just short against the great Red Wings and Stars teams of the day. Outright disappointments/upsets were few and far between for Sakic. Yzerman had more, but still reached four finals and won three Cups.

Crosby has 08 and 09. That's pretty much it. Since they won the Cup, the Penguins have won just four total playoff series, and those have all come against weak opponents. Crosby needs to have some great series against some great teams before he gets to Sakic/Yzerman level, unless you only care about what a player did in their absolute peak seasons.

Being ahead of where Sakic and Yzerman were at the 11 season mark is nice, but those guys aged very well. Sakic had his best season in his 13th year. Yzerman won three Cups past season 11. Let's wait and see if Crosby has a similarly great stretch in his 30s before concluding he's left them in the dust.

Team accomplishments =/= player accomplishments. The Pens were never as good as the Wings or Avs. I bet you cannot find a Cup winner in NHL history that was so reliant on two players for offense than the Pens were in '09. The Pens only win a series if at least one of Crosby or Malkin is playing out of their minds. Sakic and Yzerman had a lot more talent to rely on to the their multiple Cups.

And shouldn't you be saying that Crosby is ahead of Yzerman at this point if counting Cups is so important?

 

[MXD]

I think you have to look at individual runs as a player's peak. Two straight seasons is relying way too much on things that are out of a player's control.

Gilmour's '93 is legendary. Then Crosby's '09.

That's kinda like saying Patrick Roy and Ed Belfour are great goalies.

Sure. But one is better than the other. The same way Gilmour 93 + 94 is superior to Crosby 08+09, unless Cup Counting becomes important for that very specific point.

 

[MXD]

So do many d-men in comparison to Orr.

How many more years of playing at a higher level than Sakic's prime will it take to surpass him?

Actually... Zero.
He needs to play... But he passed both Sakic and Yzerman for "high end".

 

[daver]

That's kinda like saying Patrick Roy and Ed Belfour are great goalies.

Sure. But one is better than the other. The same way Gilmour 93 + 94 is superior to Crosby 08+09, unless Cup Counting becomes important for that very specific point.

I was saying combining two straight seasons to use as a metric for playoff peak doesn't make sense.

It is unfair for players whose teams didn't have two deep playoff runs in a row.