Does McDavid match Ovi's peak with another awards sweep?

[shtorm2005]

Whatever type of hockey he's playing, he should probably do more of it.

If u remember, Ovy played also like this, always at blue line ready to rush. Results? 12 years of post season failures and cup when he started to play an elite two way game.

 

[daver]

Sure, but not a lot of posters in these threads seem to care about that. I would say that by the eye test alone McDavid so far dominates hockey games on a level close to all those players, and more than Kane at his peak. He is one of the biggest game changers we have seen in the past few decades and at even strength may actually be the best.

As I said, when the eye test sees actual production that matches the peak production of those players, then it can be talked about.

 

[Dingo]

I see where you're coming from, and I'm definitely not trying to discredit the players who did indeed win, just adding context that for how dominant Ovi was for 3 straight years of leading the league in both Points and Goals per game.

2007/2008: Swept all the awards, destroyed the league in goals with a 13 goal lead over #2, lead in points

2008/2009: Lead league in goals, with a 10 goal lead over #2 whilst still missing 3 games in the season. Malkin beat him by 3 points in 3 more games. Safe to say if Ovi played those 3 games he more likely than not would have won the Ross, but either way was still the best point producer that year

2009/2010: Destroyed the league in Points per game (and led in goals per game). Crosby and Stammer had 1 goal more with 9 and 10 games respectively in hand on Ovi. Also safe to say he would have scored 1 single goal. And for points he was only 3 points back with 9/10 games less.

My whole point was that Ovechkin missing a few games due to non-injury items is a lot different than crosby missing 29/41/60 games. Ovechkin dominated the league in goals and points for 3 straight years. As mentioned earlier, I believe McDavid probably will go down as a greater hockey player than Ovi, but that peak is going to be hard to beat unless McDavid leads the league in goals for a couple years too (which he definitely could at some point, but who knows).

and he was so physical.
MacD has the ability to surpass Ovies peak, but, even though he has been amazing these last two years, i dont think either year was as good as any of Ovies 3 years.

i see mcd as a guy who is going to win so many art rosses over time that no one will bring up three year peak.

 

[Sentinel]

If McDavid wins the next seven Harts, does this mean his peak is better than Gretzky's?

 

[Bank Shot]

If u remember, Ovy played also like this, always at blue line ready to rush. Results? 12 years of post season failures and cup when he started to play an elite two way game.

That's called a narrative.

Ovechkin played pretty much the same way he has been. He was never just a cherry picker in the playoffs.

The biggest difference between the 17/18 Caps and previous editions was getting massive production from the bottom sixers in the playoffs.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

That's ridiculous.

McDavid's career ES scoring rate- 3.06 p/60
PP-5.88 p/60

More PP time means way more points because he scores at double the rate on the PP even when you take into account he had a terrible down year on the PP last season.

McDavid's first two seasons he was 10th overall in the league in PP points/60 at 6.39.

McDavid is great on the PP, and god mode at ES.

You missed my overall point.

More PP time means less ES time. So his ES scoring will go down (unless you think he'll score the exact same number of ES points in 3 or so less minutes per game) to offset whatever gains in PP points with increased PPs.

Example:

McDavid last year:
ES Points - 84 points in 1434:45 of total ESTOI
PP Points - 20 points in 243:13 of total PPTOI

During Crosby's 120 point season, his ice time breakdowns where:
Total ESTOI - 1159:27
Total PPTOI - 461:10

If we assume McDavid played in 2006-07 and got the exact same ES/PP distribution that Crosby got (more PP, less ES time), his production based on last year's production per total TOI would look like:

68 ES points (84 divided by 1434:45 times 1159:27)
38 PP points (20 divided by 243:13 times 461:10)
Total of 106 points between PP+ES

Add his 4 SHP and his total is 110.

So yes, you see a slight increase based on his current rates. But I don't think you'd see the increase some expect. I think people just assume he'd score the exact same number of ES points, but pad his totals with twice the PP points.

 

[authentic]

As I said, when the eye test sees actual production that matches the peak production of those players, then it can be talked about.

It's close enough already that given his age and being the only one who won back to back scoring titles it can be talked about.

 

[shtorm2005]

That's called a narrative.

Ovechkin played pretty much the same way he has been. He was never just a cherry picker in the playoffs.

The biggest difference between the 17/18 Caps and previous editions was getting massive production from the bottom sixers in the playoffs.

Offense wise he was always same. Last years he added a lot of 2 way work.

 

[daver]

It's close enough already that given his age and being the only one who won back to back scoring titles it can be talked about.

It can be talked about reaching that level at some point but this doesn't mean his two Art Rosses are any better than what they were. They are middle of the pack in terms of strength, and not on the level offensively as OV's 07/08 win which was an all-time great goalscoring season.

I am really surprised how people are ignoring his lower production for most of this year and/or willing to raise him up based on baseless speculation. It's it just going to make people dislike if he starts getting credit for things he hasn't done yet.

He has inargubly had one of the best starts by an 18 year old after three seasons in the last 40 to 50 years but has a lot to prove still.

 

[Regal]

I haven't heard your opinion on the fact that he wasn't in the Art Ross lead for the time the Oilers actually had a shot at the playoffs. You have given your opinion on what his season looked like after 82 games, and it's full of speculation and narrative.

You don't think that bears taking into consideration if one wants to add or diminish the value of his 108 points? And don't condecendingly act like everyone blindly accepts that McDavid was clearly the best or that his point total wasn't reflective of his abilities.

I asked you many times for other examples of seasons where the point totals of era/generational best players should be viewed as being too low and you have yet to provide one. You said Jagr as a Cap or Crosby in 2008/09 but did not give a reason why they should be viewed as being better than their point totals indicated.

I made my response in your terrible poll thread. Using a player's position among the leaders throughout a season isn't a sign of their consistency throughout the season, because they will always be heavily influenced by their start. McDavid's season could be flipped around and suddenly he's the point and PPG leaders at all of your checkpoints (30, 60 and 82 games), but his game to game consistency is no different. So how does that make someone better or worse? It makes no sense, and is pretty hilarious when you consider that your arguments for Crosby being the best are always about how he might not be the best every year but his consistency near the top makes his gap over the rest clear over time. That's literally how McDavid's season went.

And this is completely separate from the idea of whether he was better than his point totals suggest. He was the best player in the league last year regardless, and there was pretty near consensus about that.

As for the last bit, again, that's unrelated to this, but was about season to season consistency, in response to the "produce regardless" argument, not about those seasons specifically being better than those totals.

 

[Senor Catface]

I wonder how many points OV would have gotten if he had the 8th best scorer on his line for most of the year in 07/08? We could do this all day.

Not really, because you're daver, and I wouldn't spend that much time.

 

[Apotheosis]

This is coming from someone who literally got in to hockey when Ovechkin and Crosby came in to the league, who hates the fact that Edmonton landed McDavid over Toronto and isn't biased here at all. I don't get how people are saying this is "easily Ovechkin" despite how good his peak was. McDavid just had the best even strength scoring season in what, 2 decades? He had over 130 less power play opportunities than Ovechkin did in his very best peak season during that 3 year peak period and the Oilers had a historically trash power play as it is. By all advanced stats (on top of scoring 109 points on that horrible Oilers team) he also is a cut above any other forward in the league, and is better defensively than Ovechkin ever has been. If he wins another Art Ross, that's THREE in a row. Level of competition isn't even an argument either. 22 year old Crosby (you know, the one that hadn't succumb to multiple concussions yet) was bested by a nearly 30 year old Sedin, and Stamkos literally a year or so later, scored 60 to Ovechkin's 65 goals, all within the same time span during that part of the generation. Don't get me wrong, both players peaks were immense and they were the best in the league, but people act like it's some unprecedented level, cut above everything and no one was ever stopping them. Like, no.

 

[daver]

I made my response in your terrible poll thread. Using a player's position among the leaders throughout a season isn't a sign of their consistency throughout the season, because they will always be heavily influenced by their start. McDavid's season could be flipped around and suddenly he's the point and PPG leaders at all of your checkpoints (30, 60 and 82 games), but his game to game consistency is no different.

Sure. I started that poll because the narrative by some is that he was not doing any worse than the previous year as long as his PPG was hovering 1.20, which was most of the year, which completely ignored the fact that scoring was up by the elite forwards and that he was 5th to 10th in scoring thru til the 60 game mark.

While his team was trying to make the playoffs, McDavid was among the Hart candidates and amongf the best players, but it was far from "clear".

 

[daver]

Not really, because you're daver, and I wouldn't spend that much time.

So the "what if" arguments and baseless speculation can only be used to prop McDavid up? That's a load of BS.

Great players produce regardless. OV produced as a one man show in his first three years, and produced when he was surrounded by a lot of talent in his 5th year. McDavid is no different. The numbers speak for themselves.

 

[Regal]

Sure. I started that poll because the narrative by some is that he was not doing any worse than the previous year as long as his PPG was hovering 1.20, which was most of the year, which completely ignored the fact that scoring was up by the elite forwards and that he was 5th to 10th in scoring thru til the 60 game mark.

While his team was trying to make the playoffs, McDavid was among the Hart candidates and amongf the best players, but it was far from "clear".

I don't see what that has to do with the idea that McDavid was the clear best player overall this season. While the Hart isn't a best player award, if there's a general consensus on who the best player is it almost always goes to that player. McDavid didn't win due to the Oilers missing the playoffs, but almost certainly would have if they did. How he performed before the Oilers were officially out of the playoffs isn't relevant. The point being that there's a lot of context to awards and they shouldn't be the main basis for comparing players

 

[Niten Ichi Ryu]

Ovechkin. Something tells me it would be a lil bit different for mcdavid if he had 21-22 year old Crosby and malkin as direct competion. Hell a 31 year old malkin was giving him problems majority of the season and only finished 9 points back

That 31 year old Malkin had his best season in 6 years (since 2011-12). And McDavid is only 21, not even close to his prime yet. For you to use age as a comparison is hilarious.
You could look at it vice versa, 'hell a 21-year old McDavid still on his ELC, surpassed an experienced 3 time cup champ, Conn Smythe MVP Evgeni Malkin who had his best season in 6 years'

 

[daver]

Level of competition isn't even an argument either. 22 year old Crosby (you know, the one that hadn't succumb to multiple concussions yet) was bested by a nearly 30 year old Sedin, and Stamkos literally a year or so later, scored 60 to Ovechkin's 65 goals, all within the same time span during that part of the generation. Don't get me wrong, both players peaks were immense and they were the best in the league, but people act like it's some unprecedented level, cut above everything and no one was ever stopping them. Like, no.

There are no statistical anomalies in any of their seasons and once you compare their numbers to a decent sample size of their peers, the competition argument is moot beyond an argument of whether they win the actual Ross if placed in each other's seasons.

Here is what the numbers say:

OV's had a slightly higher combined points and a higher combined PPG dominance over his peers (the other top ten scorers) in his 07/08 and 08/09 seasons than McDavid did in his two Art Ross wins. This is enhanced by OV scoring goals at a generational level in 07/08. OV misses some games in his 3rd season but still is right there at the top despite this.

Both players are given the chance to max out their offensive production and I don't see a reason to put too much emphasis on play without the puck. Maybe a slight edge to McDavid for playing the more important position but not enough to erase any difference in their offensive resumes. OV has a playoff resume befitting his regular season performances although 2010 has to be viewed as an underachievement. If McDavid does't add anything to his playoff resume next season, this is a plus for OV.

McDavid would need to have a more dominant Art Ross win next year to equal OV, IMO, but still the edge could go to OV based on the playoffs.

 

[daver]

I don't see what that has to do with the idea that McDavid was the clear best player overall this season. While the Hart isn't a best player award, if there's a general consensus on who the best player is it almost always goes to that player. McDavid didn't win due to the Oilers missing the playoffs, but almost certainly would have if they did. How he performed before the Oilers were officially out of the playoffs isn't relevant. The point being that there's a lot of context to awards and they shouldn't be the main basis for comparing players

I agree that trophies should not be the main basis, as much as speculation around PPs and viewing ES scoring as being superior should not be either.

My starting point is to always look at the numbers (especially when talking about Top 6 forwards), compare them to their peers, and draw a statistical conclusion from that. If there seems to be a general consensus that other dynamics like defensive play, the amount of support a player got, the depth level of their linemates etc... then that can generally be used to differentiate players with similar production.

I don't have an issue with McDavid being viewed as the best regular season producer over the past two seasons, as OV was over that three year period. OV was a bit more dominant PPG-wise over that three years than McDavid has been but loses some ground with games missed. I will treat OV's goalscoring dominance as a tiebreaker.

I think the other dynamic in play is the assumption that McDavid had to have been better this year based despite his numbers not based on traditional development of young talent. OV, Crosby and Malkin all took steps back production-wise when one would have assumed they would only have gotten better.

 

[daver]

You missed my overall point.

More PP time means less ES time. So his ES scoring will go down (unless you think he'll score the exact same number of ES points in 3 or so less minutes per game) to offset whatever gains in PP points with increased PPs.

Example:

McDavid last year:
ES Points - 84 points in 1434:45 of total ESTOI
PP Points - 20 points in 243:13 of total PPTOI

During Crosby's 120 point season, his ice time breakdowns where:
Total ESTOI - 1159:27
Total PPTOI - 461:10

If we assume McDavid played in 2006-07 and got the exact same ES/PP distribution that Crosby got (more PP, less ES time), his production based on last year's production per total TOI would look like:

68 ES points (84 divided by 1434:45 times 1159:27)
38 PP points (20 divided by 243:13 times 461:10)
Total of 106 points between PP+ES

Add his 4 SHP and his total is 110.

So yes, you see a slight increase based on his current rates. But I don't think you'd see the increase some expect. I think people just assume he'd score the exact same number of ES points, but pad his totals with twice the PP points.

Good work. Too bad it won't mean a difference to those who like to throw out lazy narrative.

 

[Laineux]

So yes, you see a slight increase based on his current rates. But I don't think you'd see the increase some expect. I think people just assume he'd score the exact same number of ES points, but pad his totals with twice the PP points.

The smartest narrative is that McDavid's even strength production was sustainable and his PP production was unsustainably low, and there's a good reason to assume that his point totals will be higher next year.

 

[Statto]

I really find it odd/frustrating at this constant creation of threads talking about evaluating a players career when they’ve only been in the league a handful of seasons. The important word in most of the replies is ‘IF’. Even Crosby and Ovi have plenty of hockey left in them so when evaluating them there are plenty of ‘ifs’ still, but at least there is a substantial body of work to talk about. If they retired tomorrow they’d still be regarded as future legends of the game and locks to make the HOF.

IF McDavid and/or Matthews got a major knee injury in preseason and never fully recovered then dropped into being average players, they’d never be regarded as anything but lost possibilities. That’s not a knock on them but it just makes all these repeated discussions valueless. I’m not sure what’s changed in the time since the last time this was discussed, albeit with maybe a slightly different OP. Let’s them build their own meaningful bodies of work first.

So here is one for you. IF Kopitar and Kovalchuk really click and for the next 3 seasons Kopitar scores 35+ and breaks 100 points, wins 3 Selkes, adds 1 more cup (3 in total, for those with short memories) and a Conn Smythe (should of in 2014), does that make him the greatest defensive forward of all time. It’s a stretch, but IF.

I’ll stop moaning now, I’m having a bad morning.

 

[Bank Shot]

You missed my overall point.

More PP time means less ES time. So his ES scoring will go down (unless you think he'll score the exact same number of ES points in 3 or so less minutes per game) to offset whatever gains in PP points with increased PPs.

Nah. You claimed that McDavid wasn't good on the PP, but that was wrong. He just had an off season on the power play.

His previous two seasons he scored at a rate of 6.39 p/60 on the PP. In 461 minutes that would come out to 49 power play points, and Mcdavid would score 121 points to Crosby's 120.

The thing is that you're comparing Crosby's best season on the PP to Mcdavid's worst and trying to draw a conclusion that McDavid isn't suited for the PP which is just ridiculous.

 

[daver]

The smartest narrative is that McDavid's even strength production was sustainable and his PP production was unsustainably low, and there's a good reason to assume that his point totals will be higher next year.

That's the key word here. We can argue all day about what is reasonable speculation and what is not. It's still just speculation and has no place in a player assessment.

The facts are McDavid's two Art Rosses are not anything special in comparison to other Art Rosses since Wayne/Mario days. It is accepted by most that OV's 07/08 season is among the very best in the past 20 years, and his 09/10 level of play was up there too despite missing some games.

At the end of the day, McDavid brought 108 points worth of offense to his team. Adding narrative around ES points, shatty team, shatty PP etc... opens the door to narrative that he was not the best/leading Hart candidate while his team was still in playoff contention.

 

[daver]

Nah. You claimed that McDavid wasn't good on the PP, but that was wrong. He just had an off season on the power play.

His previous two seasons he scored at a rate of 6.39 p/60 on the PP. In 461 minutes that would come out to 49 power play points, and Mcdavid would score 121 points to Crosby's 120.

The thing is that you're comparing Crosby's best season on the PP to Mcdavid's worst and trying to draw a conclusion that McDavid isn't suited for the PP which is just ridiculous.

The poster claimed that McDavid's skillset is more conducive to ES play rather than on the PP. The stats back this up. They also dispelled the myth that McDavid would have put up more than 120 points using real projections.

You, on the other hand, threw out lazy narrative assuming it would just be taken as the truth.

 

[Sam Spade]

That 31 year old Malkin had his best season in 6 years (since 2011-12). And McDavid is only 21, not even close to his prime yet. For you to use age as a comparison is hilarious.

Actually if he is like all the superstars that ever played the game, last season and the upcoming two seasons will be his peak. Of course he doesn't stop being awesome after that but statistically his peak numbers will be over by 23/24.