Crosby vs McDavid (At Age 22)

[Tobias Kahun]

I had no idea Crosby did that good the first time he was in the playoffs. Didn't they lose in the first round to Ottawa?

Another surprising fact, Crosby has never lead his team in scoring when they’ve won the cup.

Almost as if it takes a very good team to win the cup

 

[McRpro]

I wasn't referring to Crosby in his first playoff.

Then why bring it up? McDavid has only made the playoffs once. Compare their first playoff appearances.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Are you trying to say that assisting a third period GWG on game 3 and then scoring GWG midway through game 4 and few minutes later on assisting an insurance goal on that game while Penguins came back from 0-2 to tie the series at 2-2, had no impact whatsoever on the series?

Was Crosby's overall production in that '09 series against Red Wings a disappointment? Yeah, that's fair to say. Did he at the same time play a crucial role in Penguins coming back to tie the series at home? Yes, yes he did. By no means was he a passenger in the series, all three of his points were impactful and he had a direct role in two of Penguins' wins.

Yes. They won those games 4-2, and Malkin had 3 assists that game 3 including the primary assists on the game tieing and game winning goals. Malkin then had an assists and goal in game 4. You can spot pick all you want, but Crosby went pointless the first 2 games and the last 3, how much of an impact can he have made not producing in the most crucial games of the series?

You can spot pick all you want. Malkin had much more of an impact getting the Pens back into the series AND winning the whole damn thing. Crosby barely played game 7 for crying out loud. He finished 5th on his own team in scoring while having one of the worst +/- on the team. His line was nowhere to be found and were liabilities.

Yes “all 3 points” were impactful....I love how Anything Crosby does good or bad, he gets praised. The “better” player had 3 points in a 7 game series, going pointless for 5 of those games, but those 3 Measly points were “impactful.” Whatever makes you feel better.

Fact? As amazing as he was that post season and as much as him and Malkin carried the Pens, he couldn’t get it done and step up when it really counted. His play in the ‘08 finals against the same team was better for crying out loud.

You can’t handle the truth and have to romanticize 3 points just to make a point.

 

[daver]

Then why bring it up? McDavid has only made the playoffs once. Compare their first playoff appearances.

Ok, Crosby lead his team in scoring and was clearly their best player. His PPG was T11 for the playoffs. McDavid was 3rd on his team in scoring and his PPG was 33rd best for the playoffs.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Delete

 

[Vujtek]

Yes. They won those games 4-2, and Malkin had 3 assists that game 3 including the primary assists on the game tieing and game winning goals. Malkin then had an assists and goal in game 4. You can spot pick all you want, but Crosby went pointless the first 2 games and the last 3, how much of an impact can he have made not producing in the most crucial games of the series?

You can spot pick all you want. Malkin had much more of an impact getting the Pens back into the series AND winning the whole damn thing. Crosby barely played game 7 for crying out loud. He finished 5th on his own team in scoring while having one of the worst +/- on the team. His line was nowhere to be found and were liabilities.

Yes “all 3 points” were impactful....I love how Anything Crosby does good or bad, he gets praised. The “better” player had 3 points in a 7 game series, going pointless for 5 of those games, but those 3 Measly points were “impactful.” Whatever makes you feel better.

Fact? As amazing as he was that post season and as much as him and Malkin carried the Pens, he couldn’t get it done and step up when it really counted. His play in the ‘08 finals against the same team was better for crying out loud.

You can’t handle the truth and have to romanticize 3 points just to make a point.

You asked how Crosby had any impact in the series at all and I pointed out how. Looks like the answer provided with facts didn't please you and it's you trying to manipulate things now. You were right, manipulating things indeed will be funny.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

What else does your crystal ball tell you?

Not without Malkin. Crosby wouldn’t have single handily carried that team anywhere. He never has, never will. Instead of being deliberately obtuse, maybe understand it’s a team game and other individuals can have just as big of an impact.

You misquote me? Cause I agree with you.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Ok, Crosby lead his team in scoring and was clearly their best player. His PPG was T11 for the playoffs. McDavid was 3rd on his team in scoring and his PPG was 33rd best for the playoffs.

That Crosby love continues to just blind you silly doesn’t it?

That was his first post season, EVER. And his only one. Crosby had a poor first post season as well. Why do you continue to ignore that?

Hossa had 27 points and 12 goals, why was Crosby “clearly” the best anything? Hossa also had more points in the finals that year as well. It certainly helps having elite teammates. Also.....Crosby led his team in production only ONE round that year. Malkin led them in the 2nd round, then Hossa the next 2 rounds.

Even the great Crosby needed more help than you would like to admit.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You misquote me? Cause I agree with you.

Totally did sorry about that

 

[GreatGonzo]

You asked how Crosby had any impact in the series at all and I pointed out how. Looks like the answer provided with facts didn't please you and it's you trying to manipulate things now. You were right, manipulating things indeed will be funny.

That’s your own way of trying to push this idea that those 3 points were impactful, which they weren’t.

That’s literally what manipulation is. And you trying to make his 3 little points in 7 games appear like game changers is the definition of that. He was nowhere to be found when they were down 2-0 in the series, he was nowhere to be found when they went down 3-2 games, he was no where to be found in games 6 and barely played game 7.

Where’s the impact?

 

[FartMilk]

This dude is acting like Crosby was lighting the world on fire his first playoff. He was 2-3-5 in 5 GP his first series. McDavid was 2-2-4 in 6 GP his first series. Crosby scored a point in three games. McDavid in four games.

 

[Vujtek]

That’s your own way of trying to push this idea that those 3 points were impactful, which they weren’t.

That’s literally what manipulation is. And you trying to make his 3 little points in 7 games appear like game changers is the definition of that. He was nowhere to be found when they were down 2-0 in the series, he was nowhere to be found when they went down 3-2 games, he was no where to be found in games 6 and barely played game 7.

Where’s the impact?

Keep on trying to manipulate things more.

I guess having a hand in your team coming back from 0-2 to tie the series 2-2 doesn't count as having an impact. Okay, then. Keep telling yourself whatever makes you feel better. Your "nowhere to be found" scenarios conveniently leave out those 'non-impactful' games 3 and 4, that's funny.

Again, you asked how Crosby had ANY impact in that series and I showed you how. But by all means keep on twisting things more.

 

[6ix]

Crosby wasn’t “complete” from 18-22 though. We are talking about their first few years. Actually McDavid could probably have a better argument of being better defensively than Crosby was at age 22.

Crosby wouldn’t have won anything on those Oilers teams. It’s easier to win when you have a better team around you with a better player like Malkin wouldn’t you say?

Crosby was an elite grinder already at those ages. No surprise a flyers fan being salty. Wasn’t that Draisaitl guy supposed to be his Malkin? I mean that’s what Oiler fans claim.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Crosby was an elite grinder already at those ages. No surprise a flyers fan being salty. Wasn’t that Draisaitl guy supposed to be his Malkin? I mean that’s what Oiler fans claim.

I don’t know how you can ever objectively categorize an “elite grinder” but he still wasn’t the well rounded player back then like he is now. You can huff and puff about that all you like, doesn’t make it less true.

Also, not a Flyers fan, but you attacking anyone for being “salty” or part of a certain fan base doesn’t make it less factual as well. Go cry about it somewhere else.

Keep on trying to manipulate things more.

I guess having a hand in your team coming back from 0-2 to tie the series 2-2 doesn't count as having an impact. Okay, then. Keep telling yourself whatever makes you feel better. Your "nowhere to be found" scenarios conveniently leave out those 'non-impactful' games 3 and 4, that's funny.

Again, you asked how Crosby had ANY impact in that series and I showed you how. But by all means keep on twisting things more.

Having a hand? Sure....but your still overrating the impact in general. Especially considering how he played before and after those two games. So he helped his team get back into the series, then what? He completely disappeared again.

How was his playing any more impactful for them winning the series? It wasn’t. Crosby had one assists in game 3, and then had a solid game in game 4.....what exactly was “impacful” about his performance that would have lead to them winning?

Game 6 and 7 were the most crucial and he was a now show both games. He could play in games 3 and 4 in any way, still doesn’t change that when it REALLY counted, he made no impact. Letang and Malkin had more of an impact in games 3 and 4 than Crosby did.

 

[Vujtek]

Having a hand? Sure....but your still overrating the impact in general. Especially considering how he played before and after those two games. So he helped his team get back into the series, then what? He completely disappeared again.

How was his playing any more impactful for them winning the series? It wasn’t. Crosby had one assists in game 3, and then had a solid game in game 4.....what exactly was “impacful” about his performance that would have lead to them winning?

Game 6 and 7 were the most crucial and he was a now show both games. He could play in games 3 and 4 in any way, still doesn’t change that when it REALLY counted, he made no impact. Letang and Malkin had more of an impact in games 3 and 4 than Crosby did.

Okay, sure.

Letang and Malkin potentially having more impact in in games 3 and 4 doesn't take anything away from Crosby's impact in those games, and that was the question.

Anyways, once again you only asked how Crosby had ANY impact in the series and I show with facts how. I'm not overrating anything here, I'm taking facts as they are. But you can try to keep on twistings things.

Carry on.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Many voted for him because of his playoff success.....what are you talking about? Did they choose him based on his individual achievements? Exactly. It doesn’t make sense, doesn’t make it less the truth that people have picked Crosby. Your obviously not one of them, but many others still think that way.

they aren’t ignoring playoffs, they see it for what it is. This would be a different race if McDavid had made the playoffs the last 4 years and choked every time. Instead we have one post season to go off of where he wasn’t all that great, and you yourself have seen that used against him, which is nonsense.

As opposed to many Pen fans trying to compare Draisatl and Malkin while ignoring Malkins impact on their first cup run? It goes both ways buddy.

Fact is, their playoff opportunities aren’t equal because of the teams they play on. Many pro Crosby fanboys have used that against McDavid as if that’s his fault, while Pro McDavid posters have used Malkin against Crosby, either way.....I’m not saying playoffs shouldn’t be used, only with the very needed context. But the fact that Crosby was able to win a cup shouldn’t mean he’s “AINEC” better than McDavid. We have no idea how he would have done if he had actually made the post season, what we do know is it’s not even close his fault that they haven’t.

Being money in the playoffs is different than just having a cup. Voting Crosby over McDavid because of Crosby’s playoff performances is totally legitimate. However, voting Crosby over McDavid because Crosby has a cup just isn’t right. I’ll repeat it again, I didn’t see a single poster in this thread writing that he choose Crosby SOLELY based on the fact that Crosby has a cup while McDavid hasn’t. There’s quite a difference between the 2. I saw some posters say that Crosby carried his team to the Finals, which is false, but it’s still not the same thing as voting Crosby solely because he has a cup. (The “1 > 0” stupid argument)

The problem is, you can’t ignore Crosby’s playoff success and you also can’t suppose that McDavid would do the same with Crosby’s team. I cant really argue with someone picking McDavid since he has a good case too, but the fact that some McDavid voters are claiming that it isn’t close makes me chuckle.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Okay, sure.

Letang and Malkin potentially having more impact in in games 3 and 4 doesn't take anything away from Crosby's impact in those games, and that was the question.

Anyways, once again you only asked how Crosby had ANY impact in the series and I show with facts how. I'm not overrating anything here, I'm taking facts as they are. But you can try to keep on twistings things.

Carry on.

Potentially? The conn Smythe winner definitely had more of an impact, while Letang actually out played Crosby. Nothing potential, he simply wasn’t good at all that series while showing up for 2 games where his own teammates still out played him.

Impact on them WINNING. He helped tied the series, then what? Let’s say they lost in 6 and Crosby played exactly how he played in games 5 and 6, then there is no argument....but Difference is his team forced a game 7, where then Crosby barely played anyway. Your putting to much emphasis on those 2 games as if they’re the deciding factor, they tied the series. When it came down to actually winning, Crosby had no impact.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Being money in the playoffs is different than just having a cup. Voting Crosby over McDavid because of Crosby’s playoff performances is totally legitimate. However, voting Crosby over McDavid because Crosby has a cup just isn’t right. I’ll repeat it again, I didn’t see a single poster in this thread writing that he choose Crosby SOLELY based on the fact that Crosby has a cup while McDavid hasn’t. There’s quite a difference between the 2. I saw some posters say that Crosby carried his team to the Finals, which is false, but it’s still not the same thing as voting Crosby solely because he has a cup. (The “1 > 0” stupid argument)

The problem is, you can’t ignore Crosby’s playoff success and you also can’t suppose that McDavid would do the same with Crosby’s team. I cant really argue with someone picking McDavid since he has a good case too, but the fact that some McDavid voters are claiming that it isn’t close makes me chuckle.

It’s legitimate under the false idea that he’s “better” because he happened to have a better team around him with an arguably better player on that very same team.

I agree with you, and I’m not saying you are among them, but come on. That’s very much a huge reason why many have voted for Crosby, because in the end....the cup is all that matters and Crosby “lead” them to the cup while McDavid was collecting meaningless RS awards.

I’m not ignoring it. He embraced the post season and ran with it, but is it still fair to say he’s better just because he had more opportunities to make that leap? That’s my point. McDavid had one opportunity and he didn’t play very well in the second round. Now that’s attached to his playoff legacy for the team time until otherwise. We are talking about 2 players that have the same impact on their teams, the difference is one had more help than the others. It’s unfair but it doesn’t mean Crosby ISNT better, but not because of something out of McDavids control.

 

[Vujtek]

Potentially? The conn Smythe winner definitely had more of an impact, while Letang actually out played Crosby. Nothing potential, he simply wasn’t good at all that series while showing up for 2 games where his own teammates still out played him.

Impact on them WINNING. He helped tied the series, then what? Let’s say they lost in 6 and Crosby played exactly how he played in games 5 and 6, then there is no argument....but Difference is his team forced a game 7, where then Crosby barely played anyway. Your putting to much emphasis on those 2 games as if they’re the deciding factor, they tied the series. When it came down to actually winning, Crosby had no impact.

Are you really that clueless on how one does win the Cup? You need 16 wins and 4 of them in the Final. And for the 100th time, Crosby had direct impact on two of Pens' wins in the Final.

How do you figure Letang had more of an impact in games 3 and 4 than Crosby? Where do you base that on?

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

Please explain how his play in those finals had ANY impact. 1 goal, 3 points...a -3 +/-. Only scored in 2/7 games. While barely being on the ice in game 7..... I’ll be waiting for you to manipulate something to further your love for all things Crosby or any other excuse you have.....because I know it’s going to be not just false, but funny.

As opposed to sucking half the year like Crosby did last year and finishing 3rd on his own team in scoring.....you and your bias ways write it off as him “saving” himself. It’s sad but hilarious. It’s a nice way to continue giving Crosby the benefit of the doubt, and further strokes your ego and unnatural feelings towards him.

By the way. McDavid was basically on the same pace the following season as last season during that time frame. It’s not hard to understand basic stats and logic, maybe reconsider your stance and look through all the facts before making such judgement calls.

Just let it go, embrace the change. You can’t keep coming up with excuses just because it hurts your fragile feelings that Crosby is no longer the best. I know you love him ever so deeply and all, and with that love, MUST come hate for anyone else who actually comes out as “better.” Just have yourself a nice cry and go get some fresh air.

his mere presence on the ice in 2009 helped them win, no shame in being shut down by lidstrom and prime zetterberg

crosby was the best player in the world during the playoff run last year, yes he was saving himself for when it counts unlike mcdavid who took it up a notch when his team was clearly playing for nothing else

would you take kessel over crosby because he scored 4 more points? sounds like you would

yes i love him, why the hell wouldn't i love the 3rd best player of all time?

you keep saying that i'm crying or angry, that is you here bud

 

[GreatGonzo]

Are you really that clueless on how one does win the Cup? You need 16 wins and 4 of them in the Final. And for the 100th time, Crosby had direct impact on two of Pens' wins in the Final.

How do you figure Letang had more of an impact in games 3 and 4 than Crosby? Where do you base that on?

The problem is your putting way to much on this “impact” that once again isn’t even that distinguishing. Crosby didn’t stick out, he was their best player. He didn’t contribute to a point where those 3 points were the difference between winning and losing those games.

Letang had the same amount of points as Crosby. What is to say he wasn’t better? Maybe not CLEARLY better, but I was speaking more for that entire series.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

It’s legitimate under the false idea that he’s “better” because he happened to have a better team around him with an arguably better player on that very same team.

I agree with you, and I’m not saying you are among them, but come on. That’s very much a huge reason why many have voted for Crosby, because in the end....the cup is all that matters and Crosby “lead” them to the cup while McDavid was collecting meaningless RS awards.

I’m not ignoring it. He embraced the post season and ran with it, but is it still fair to say he’s better just because he had more opportunities to make that leap? That’s my point. McDavid had one opportunity and he didn’t play very well in the second round. Now that’s attached to his playoff legacy for the team time until otherwise. We are talking about 2 players that have the same impact on their teams, the difference is one had more help than the others. It’s unfair but it doesn’t mean Crosby ISNT better, but not because of something out of McDavids control.

You seem to act as though merely getting to play more games in the playoffs means a player will be guaranteed to produce more. That's the problem with your stance on Crosby. Having a good team around him is the reason he was able to produce in the playoffs.

If he was a playoff dud, it could actually have the opposite effect. Going 24 games and only getting 10 points looks a lot worse than going 10 games and only getting 5 points. Crosby playing more games isn't the reason he's ranked where he is all-time in career points.

 

[GreatGonzo]

his mere presence on the ice in 2009 helped them win, no shame in being shut down by lidstrom and prime zetterberg

crosby was the best player in the world during the playoff run last year, yes he was saving himself for when it counts unlike mcdavid who took it up a notch when his team was clearly playing for nothing else

would you take kessel over crosby because he scored 4 more points? sounds like you would

yes i love him, why the hell wouldn't i love the 3rd best player of all time?

you keep saying that i'm crying or angry, that is you here bud

His mere presence? Does his presence make him suck while everyone around him gets to do all the hard work?

Actually Ovechkin was while Malkin our played Crosby. Nice try though. Save himself when it counted? What does that even mean....he didn’t save myself for anything, he simply was out matched and out played.
Right.....McDavid doesn’t have the luxury of having Malkin, And then Kessel.

I know the Pens don’t win a cup and Crosby doesnt have a Smythe without Kessel, especially in round two when Kessel carried Crosby past the Caps and played equally well in the conference finals. But I’m sure Crosby’s “presence” had a lot to do with that.

Because your so sensitive to any and every criticism about Crosby that you resort to making ridiculous claims like his “presence” helps them win while creating an alternative reality where he does no wrong.

We get it, it’s ok. You HAVE to lie, manipulate, and dramatize everything about him in order to cater to your emotions so you don’t get upset.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You seem to act as though merely getting to play more games in the playoffs means a player will be guaranteed to produce more. That's the problem with your stance on Crosby. Having a good team around him is the reason he was able to produce in the playoffs.

If he was a playoff dud, it could actually have the opposite effect. Going 24 games and only getting 10 points looks a lot worse than going 10 games and only getting 5 points. Crosby playing more games isn't the reason he's ranked where he is all-time in career points.

Having more playoff experience certainly helps getting a player more prepared for the post season, wouldn’t you think? It’s more ridiculous to just assume McDavid would fall flat every post season based on his play within his only one.

I never said that, I said having a good team around him helped him have more opportunities to play in the post season and for the cup. His play alone gets all my credit, but he’s only one player and still needed help. Every great player has.

I agree, but that same logic still should stand for McDavid, who still hasn’t had a chance to prove or disprove everyone’s thoughts on his playoff play. They are both generational talents, their play will speak for itself, but That doesn’t change that Crosby had more opportunities to make that jump. Until McDavid gets the same, it’s hard to say.

 

[Vujtek]

The problem is your putting way to much on this “impact” that once again isn’t even that distinguishing. Crosby didn’t stick out, he was their best player. He didn’t contribute to a point where those 3 points were the difference between winning and losing those games.

Letang had the same amount of points as Crosby. What is to say he wasn’t better? Maybe not CLEARLY better, but I was speaking more for that entire series.

Having a hand in two game-winning goals (one midway through the game and one in the third period so it's not like they were opening minute goals where afterwards opponent was shut down for 60 minutes in a lopsided win) isn't distinguishable impact? You learn something new everyday...

With regards to Letang the talk clearly specifically was in games 3 and 4 so no backpedaling there.

Also what I dodn't get is that now you're downplaying Crosby's contribution to Pens wins and are asking questions like this:

Impact on them WINNING. He helped tied the series, then what? Let’s say they lost in 6 and Crosby played exactly how he played in games 5 and 6, then there is no argument....but Difference is his team forced a game 7, where then Crosby barely played anyway. Your putting to much emphasis on those 2 games as if they’re the deciding factor, they tied the series. When it came down to actually winning, Crosby had no impact.

That wasn't your original question, so again you're trying to manipulate things. You asked about Crosby having ANY impact in the SERIES. Not in games 5-7. But in the SERIES. Last time I checked games 3-4 belonged to the series as well. So I'm not putting too much emphasis on anything. I'm showing you with facts how Crosby impacted the series. Never once have I told you he had the biggest impact in the series or anything like that. But I've shown you that he had an impact in the series, impact in Pens being able to win the series (again I guess I need to point out that winning a series requires four wins).

In your original question you said to the poster that he will be manipulating things and it will be funny. Well you've been doing nothing but that when I only presented you with the fact on how Crosby had ANY impact in the series. And sure enough, it has been funny. But I'm done with you here. I'm sure you want to get the last word in so go ahead.