Hockey History: Who was better than Connor McDavid?
- Thread starter Say Hey Kid
- Start date
Nathaniel Skywalker
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2013
- 13,824
- 5,392
McFlash97
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 7,469
- 6,505
McDavid dominates a sheet of ice better then all of those guys. Per shift impact only Jagr and Hasek at thier absolute height can stand next to him.
Say Hey Kid
Bathory
I've been watching since the 60s and I think the exact opposite.
Dominance
99-66-4-9-87/97
But he’s been watching really intently since probably 2016, so there.
Say Hey Kid
Bathory
McFlash97
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 7,469
- 6,505
Lidstrom is quickly turning into the one of the most overrated players in history. Playing on stacked teams in a watered down era where teams thrived on playing the trap.. never really being dominant in any one season... just consistent...and winning Norris Trophies in several seasons where he had no business winning. 7 Norris Trophies.. you can't take that away from him, but his reputation won him at least 3.
Hockeyholic
Registered User
Regular season? Absolutely.
Postseason? Not a chance.
Though McDavid has like 14 more years to change that narrative.
Bear of Bad News
Your Third or Fourth Favorite HFBoards Admin
- Sep 27, 2005
- 13,508
- 26,914
Hard to vote, given all of the different ways one can interpret "better".
Better as in absolute ability? Jagr, Hasek, Potvin, maybe Shore.
Better in terms of career? Most if not all of them.
He could realistically pass all in boh categories but I don't expect him to pass Jagr since he has yet to match him for peak in my mind and his longveity is quite excellent.
He could also still end up at the bottom of the group. I voted somewhat like I think is realistic where he will end up if he doesnt improve further. I realise I rank Crosby lower than most but I am content on that hill.
Better in terms of career? Most if not all of them.
He could realistically pass all in boh categories but I don't expect him to pass Jagr since he has yet to match him for peak in my mind and his longveity is quite excellent.
He could also still end up at the bottom of the group. I voted somewhat like I think is realistic where he will end up if he doesnt improve further. I realise I rank Crosby lower than most but I am content on that hill.
- May 22, 2008
- 9,835
- 2,151
At this point I'd have to go with Crosby and Jagr (as much as it pains me as a Flyers fan), plus Hasek. This could change, but without any semblance of playoff success, it's hard to go with McDavid above those three at this point.
Also, for the record I haven't really seen much or any of Plante, Kelly, Nighbor or Shore outside of highlights or just reading about them, so it's hard for me to gauge personally.
Also, for the record I haven't really seen much or any of Plante, Kelly, Nighbor or Shore outside of highlights or just reading about them, so it's hard for me to gauge personally.
I don´t know. If this would be genuine attempt to talk about hockey history of players I would hope OP would give some insight of the players.But because that isn´t provided I go with McDavid.
ted2019
History of Hockey
All of the the above. Maybe he should preform in the playoffs first before saying that he is better then a Frank Nighbor, Jacques Plante or Crosby.
ted2019
History of Hockey
Well yes I know it and understand it. But then again what is the purpose of asking it here without providing any insight. There is mo requirement to be interested of hockey history. Without any kind of insight to the question this just seems of fishing certain kind of responses. Personally I do not understand it. (and yes I know I should just ignore it)
CatchyTune
JOHN TAVARES IS A MAPLE LEAF
Crosby most definitely.
I'd also probably take the 2nd best defenseman in Lidstrom over him as well.
I'd also probably take the 2nd best defenseman in Lidstrom over him as well.
Samsquanch
Raging Bull Squatch
Eddie Shore was 3 years away from being born in the 19th century (the 1800s), and was 90yr old Don Cherry's coach in the minors FFS
.Can we really compare anything he did in the game with what we're watching today? I think not lol.
Which ones? The only year you can really make a case for a reputation award was his final one, and by the same token you could argue he could have won a couple of his runner ups without the bias against Euro defensemen. If anything I think his consistency and the low-scoring of the era making offense so valuable made his peak underrated at this point. I think he was clearly better than any defenseman over the past 5-6 seasons and yet guys like Karlsson and Hedman have been discussed as being closer to the top of the league than he was.
Howe started his NHL career just 7 years after Shore retired. So wheres your line?Eddie Shore was 3 years away from being born in the 19th century (the 1800s), and was 90yr old Don Cherry's coach in the minors FFS
Can we really compare anything he did in the game with what we're watching today? I think not lol.
In 30 years will Howe disregarded as a hockey all-time great because its been 110 years since hes played? You see the problem here?
I mean if its its ok to include Howe and compare him to modern players so should Shore and Morenz for that matter. You cant just pretend the NHL didnt exist from 1910-30 because it was 100 years ago.
You cant compare their athletic ability to today obviously, that would be stupid. Much like you cant compare Orr to today, as he wouldnt even make the NHL.... What you can do is say Shore was as dominant a player as there was during HIS TIME. Like Howe, Richard, Orr, Hull, Gretzky were. Shore and Morenz are no different.
Last edited:
