Crosby vs players from 90s

[RorschachWJK]

LOL.

Also, remember his first couple of months in the league? He was a diving loudmouth. He would have taken a beating for that alone.

Yes I do but he was a major whiner for much longer than a few months. Yet for some people the guy can do no wrong...

 

[TooManyHumans]

Yes I do but he was a major whiner for much longer than a few months. Yet for some people the guy can do no wrong...

He was getting routinely assaulted on the ice and the league did nothing to protect him. If he had whined harder maybe he could have avoided the concussion issues that robbed us all of getting to watch him in his prime. The NHL is the only league that doesn't care at all about protecting it's stars.

 

[TopShelfYzerman]

Imo, Crosby is a top10 player of all time. I'd be okay saying that. He is still my favourite hockey player and I hope he can win another Cup.

If Crosby went head-to-head against Gretz he would destroy Wayne. Sid has the body of a man, while Wayne was built like a teenaged girl, sorta like EP40.

90s was my time, so after Lemieux and Jagr I'd be okay saying he's the best Penguin ever.

An average pro sprinter would destroy Jessie Owen's in 100 m dash. They are not better in an all time sense.

 

[wetcoast]

I 100% agree with that. I feel like Jagr is very underrated here. Maybe because he went to Russia and he was old when he returned. But from 18-30 he was special. And even with the rangers he was still special.

I also think Jagr is under rated by many and have no problem putting him and Crosby on the same tier but Crosby is definitely higher and has an entire career of prime play from the drop and it took Jagr until his 3rd year to reach elite level.

That creates separation between the 2 as well as playoff resumes.

Jagr isn’t as bad in the playoffs that some of his detractors would have him but Crosby in in elite territory playoff wise as well.

 

[Czech Your Math]

I also think Jagr is under rated by many and have no problem putting him and Crosby on the same tier but Crosby is definitely higher and has an entire career of prime play from the drop and it took Jagr until his 3rd year to reach elite level.

That creates separation between the 2 as well as playoff resumes.

Jagr isn’t as bad in the playoffs that some of his detractors would have him but Crosby in in elite territory playoff wise as well.

Sure, it took Jagr longer to get going (although he already led the playoffs in even strength goals & points at age 20, during the Pens' second Cup), but also won a Pearson at age 34 while playing with castoffs and had more points that year than Crosby did the following year (in what was easily his career high season in points).

Crosby's been good in the playoffs, very good thru 2009 ECF, not as good after that IMO. From 2009 SCF to present (ages 21-33): 132-46-85-131 (-3)

He and Malkin have also benefitted from relatively easy roads in the playoffs. The one time they played Boston, they were skunked and swept. They did get past a strong Lightning team, although they were each < PPG. Of all the post-lockout western powers, they never had to play Chicago or Kings, but did play Wings twice. They were fortunate to get some help from league before series (moving it up a week when Datsyuk & Lidstrom were gimpy) and from refs in game 3 (missing blatant too many men that helped Pens stay in game and eventually win), but hey they did split the two SCF with Detroit... thanks Max Talbot! Crosby was 13-2-6-9 (-2) to go along with his 4-0-0-0 (-2) vs. Boston in 2013 ECF. Malkin was 13-3-8-11 (-2) to go along with his 4-0-0-0 (-5) vs. Boston. So when they had to play tough defensive teams (although 2009 Wings were actually not super tough, based on regular season GA and those injuries to key defenders), they didn't fare very well.

Against teams in the upper half of defense among playoff teams (either top 4 in conference or top 8 in NHL in GA among those teams), Crosby has 0.80 PPG in 82 GP, while Malkin has 0.89 in 81 GP. This contrasts to other players in such circumstances, such as:

Peter Stastny 1.28 PPG in 74 thru age 35 (higher scoring era... but he also faced top 4 in NHL GA in 12/16 series)
Jagr 1.23 in 96 from ages 20-36 (average defensive opponents overall)
Bure 1.22 in 46 (somewhat easy)
Kucherov 1.17 in 75 (pretty tough)
Sakic 1.05 in 146 (somewhat tough)
Forsberg 1.05 in 127 (somewhat tough)
Kane 0.99 in 96 (pretty easy)

Who's in Crosby's range? Iginla at 0.80, Thornton at 0.79 & Stamkos at 0.78 (Iginla & Stamkos faced tough defensive teams in playoffs, Thornton about average).

Sakic & Forsberg's median playoff opponent ranked 3.0/3.5 in conference and 5.0 overall in GA among playoff teams. Crosby & Malkin's median playoff opponent ranked 5.0 in conference and 10.0 overall in GA among playoff teams. Using an average weighted by GP, Sakic & Forsberg had opponents averaging 3.5 in conference & 6.3 overall, while Crosby & Malkin had opponents averaging 4.3 in conference and 8.6/8.7 overall. Sakic & Forsberg played teams in the upper half defensively among playoff teams 25 & 21 times respectively, while each had 5 series against teams in the lower half. Crosby & Malkin played teams in the upper half 15 times and in the lower half 16 times. So those numbers, their PPGs against opponents in the upper half, and specific series against the defensive powers tell the same story: Crosby & Malkin had it quite easy relative to most others, which boosted their playoff PPG. I'm not saying they haven't beeng good, of course, but they haven't been nearly as great as many perceive.

 

[SwedishFire]

1. Lemieux
2. Jagr/Crosby
3. Forsberg/Sakic/Yzerman/Lindros
4. Bure/Hull/Fedorov/Selanne/Mogilny/Sundin

1. Lemeiux
2. Crosby, Forsberg, Jagr. Forsberg could do everything! Crosby being smoother, Forsberg harder and thougher, while being Datsiyuk like. Jagr being more one dimensional than the others.
3. Sakic, Yzerman
4. Lindros. No way I have Lindros in the same tier as Sakic and Yzerman. Those where just more talanted. I think its actually just candians that ranks Lindros higher.

 

[daver]

1. Lemeiux
2. Crosby, Forsberg, Jagr. Forsberg could do everything! Crosby being smoother, Forsberg harder and thougher, while being Datsiyuk like. Jagr being more one dimensional than the others.
3. Sakic, Yzerman
4. Lindros. No way I have Lindros in the same tier as Sakic and Yzerman. Those where just more talanted. I think its actually just candians that ranks Lindros higher.

Says the Swedish poster who rates Forsberg higher than any other objective rating has him rated.

 

[SwedishFire]

Says the Swedish poster who rates Forsberg higher than any other objective rating has him rated.

Should I say the same avout every canadian ”legend” as well?

 

[daver]

Should I say the same avout every canadian ”legend” as well?

So what is your justification for Lindros being 4th on your list?

He certainly wasn't behind any of those players offensively during the few seasons he was relative healthy. And he was undoubtedly the most impactful player besides his offense.

 

[SwedishFire]

So what is your justification for Lindros being 4th on your list?

He certainly wasn't behind any of those players offensively during the few seasons he was relative healthy. And he was undoubtedly the most impactful player besides his offense.

Very mush head down player. A good skater, but what about his hands? Not elite hands.

 

[daver]

Very mush head down player. A good skater, but what about his hands? Not elite hands.

I think he had pretty good hand but relied on his physicality also to generate offense. When he wasn't as physical, his offense suffered.

I also think Forsberg would not be as effective if he wasn't as physical which lead to him being injury-prone.

 

[86Habs]

Lemieux was better, buy a sizable margin, than anyone else on this list. That much should be clear.

I have Crosby and Jagr in the same tier. Both highly productive for a long period of time, and both top ~10-12 players of all-time imo. While I don't think Crosby is/was as offensively talented as Jagr, he added other elements to his game over the course of his career and his trophy case, even with missing significant parts of his peak years, is more impressive than Jagr's. There is clear separation between Crosby and Sakic/Forsberg/Yzerman, as he was able to do everything at a slightly higher level than those three players (more physical/better possession player than Sakic; better goal scorer/healthier than Forsberg; molded the offensive/defensive elements of this game better than Yzerman). As to Lindros, if he had had a relatively normal career (maturation, peak, prime, post-prime years) I think we'd see him in a different light and he'd be at the top of this tier with Crosby and Jagr. If he had had a career progression like Sakic I have no doubt he'd be a top-10 player of all-time. As it is, he is unfortunately difficult to evaluate but had the attributes of a generational talent.

Sakic, Yzerman and Forsberg belong in the same group. Yzerman and Forsberg were certainly the most talented out of this group, but Sakic seemed to have gotten the most out of his talent and was able to stay healthy, consistent and productive for longer than the other two. The eye test from watching nearly the entirety of these guys' careers tells me that Yzerman and Forsberg were most skilled, though. Career-wise its Sakic, Yzerman, Forsberg; talent-wise its Yzerman, Forsberg, Sakic. If Modano was an option, I'd put him at the bottom of this tier. And if Fedorov was an option, he'd be somewhere slighly below Forsberg...at the top of this tier for talent, but at the bottom for consistency and ability to sustain peak play.

 

[Baaaaaaaaaaaaah]

Gross. A Crosby thread.

 

[Rorschach]

1. Lemieux
2. Jagr/Crosby
3. Forsberg/Sakic/Yzerman/Lindros
4. Bure/Hull/Fedorov/Selanne/Mogilny/Sundin

I like this list a lot. Maybe Sundin is a 3.5. Selanne, before his Achilles skate cut injury would have made 2.

 

[Rorschach]

Stop reminding me of that Pond of Dreams thing from the 2000 All-Star Game.

Quite clearly the best use of time travel would be a pond hockey tournament of the best players from each generation.

Man I gotta find a copy of this in 8x10 autographed by Gordie Howe. Imagine getting the other players to sign this in person. It would probably cost $2000 not counting travel or expenses like card show entry fees.

 

[Hockeyholic]

Really no comparison.

Crosby is inferior to 99, 66, Jagr, Hasek, Sakic, Yzerman, and Messier.

 

[psycat]

No matter what tier you put Crosby on, he's not on the Wayne/Mario tier.

So whether he's generational or not, he's still a tier below those guys.

To be fair Mario is not on Gretzky's level either(still closer to #99 than Crosby of course).

 

[shaner82]

To be fair Mario is not on Gretzky's level either(still closer to #99 than Crosby of course).

I disagree, but don't want to turn this into a Wayne vs Mario thread so I'll just leave it at that

 

[bertuzzi2bure]

I didnt get to watch 90s Jagr but even daddy Jagr of the 2000s was an animal. I think even from what I saw in the 2000s from Jagr puts him ahead of Crosby and Ovechkin for me.

Probably safe to say both Crosby and Ovi are Yzerman and Sakic tier? Maybe one tier ahead?

 

[bertuzzi2bure]

Also, hopefully the people making lists here actually saw these players play in their prime. I always lol when guys who are like 18 years old try to compare players now to early 90s and they never watched them play.

I started to seriously follow in 02/3 and the players whos careers included the 90s that I was always most impressed watching were:
Sakic
Forsberg
Jagr
Lidstrom
Hasek
Brodeur
Pronger
Roy

Guys like Federov and Yzerman were already kinda dropping off by the time I started watching. Cant really give them a fair review. I didnt see enough of Modano or Sundin.

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

He's not as good as Jagr.

I think he is better! at winning!

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

Drop Yzerman into today's NHL with today's training, nutrition, etc. and he obliterates the league.
It works both ways.

Agree on this logic. Comparing two era is extremely tough. The physical play in the previous era compared to this one, including the red line (which was remove for the exception of icing) gave skill players really less space and neutral zone challenge to get speed and imo this would be a challenge for some modern actual player.

 

[SCampo98]

I love Crosby, always have since I was a kid, bur I'm not sure gender stabd a chance I the clutch and grab era.

He'd never get the open space he's been able to make for himself these past 15 years.

 

[wetcoast]

Really no comparison.

Crosby is inferior to 99, 66, Jagr, Hasek, Sakic, Yzerman, and Messier.

This is easy to say and for the first 2 players there is a lot of supporting evidence, for the rest what exactly is the case....if any?

 

[Hockeyholic]

This is easy to say and for the first 2 players there is a lot of supporting evidence, for the rest what exactly is the case....if any?

Jagr has the domination over his peers and awards. The eye test too. Doesn't necessarily mean I'd take Jagr over Crosby on my team. Question is better. Not more important.

Hasek was a one man show.

Yzerman and Sakic's leadership and intangibles are second to none. Playoff warriors.