How High can Crosby reach in all-time Centers Ranking?

[steve141]

I understand the case for Wayne and Mario, to a lesser degree, but the other 3 guys how so?

And especially the solidly part of being ahead?

just can't see the argument for any of those 3 guys being solidly ahead, in fact all 3 have similar problems to Sid's resume, ie slower start, not as consistent in the playoffs ect....

At 27 Mikita had won four Art Rosses, 2 Harts, 6 1st Team All-Stars, 1 2nd Team All-Star, 1 Cup. Sid is close, but clearly one step behind.

Trottier had 4 All-Star Teams, 1 Hart, 1 Smythe, 4 Cups. Again Sid is close, but Trottier's two-way game and playoffs put him clearly ahead of Crosby.

Clarke had 3 Harts (in competition with Orr), 2 Cups, 4 All-Star Teams, and two of the best defensive seasons ever. Greater number of Harts and Cups.

Crosby has a chance at surpassing them all with a couple of more seasons as the best player, but he hasn't done it yet.

 

[Rhiessan71]

What was lacking in Crosby's performance in 2014?

And Crosby gets no credit for scoring clutch goals in 2010 and 2014 while Kane's clutchness makes up for a 20% PO scoring gap? Nice double standard.

I never once said Crosby was bad, I said he was Mediocre, mostly invisible and just another Canadian player.
That he WASN'T even close to being the best player on even his own team in either Olympics, let alone living up to the title as the best player in the world.
He most certainly gets credit for the Golden Gold, as I already said.

As for Kane, he plays in the West and doesn't get to pad his numbers vs teams like the Sens, Isles and Caines.

Its not about Sid being bad, its about him not being great or even very good.
His performances in the Olympics do not help his case and really, for the purpose of this thread, his mediocre performances actually hurt him.

 

[Rhiessan71]

BTW sid scored another goal tonight and will take the scoring lead and hold it for good, barring injury, sometime next week for the rest of the season.

Yeah and he was also the guy that took a terrible penalty with 10 seconds left after not tieing up his center on the draw.
The Stars converted that PP into the game winner with 3 seconds left.

 

[arizona beamer*]

Pretend Crosby had never been injured/concussed...

you have a top 10 EASY.

Pretend Crosby played 20 years ago, you have a potential TOP 5.

With his current circumstances, he is a top 20.

 

[daver]

Now, I didn't say his performance was BAD in the Finals or the OG. He was just not the MVP. Not even close. Not Smythe-worthy.

If 27 points and 31 points aren't even close to Smythe-worthy, what is?

 

[daver]

.As for Kane, he plays in the West and doesn't get to pad his numbers vs teams like the Sens, Isles and Caines.

Kane's PPG is about 1.00, Crosby's PPG against playoff teams in with a Top Ten GAA is about 1.00 which includes the Caines BTW.

And how does one pad stats in the playoffs? Are you saying his points are less valuable than Kane's?

 

[daver]

I never once said Crosby was bad, I said he was Mediocre, mostly invisible and just another Canadian player.
That he WASN'T even close to being the best player on even his own team in either Olympics, let alone living up to the title as the best player in the world.
He most certainly gets credit for the Golden Gold, as I already said.

Which forwards were better on Team Canada in 2014 and why?

 

[Pip]

I never once said Crosby was bad, I said he was Mediocre, mostly invisible and just another Canadian player.
That he WASN'T even close to being the best player on even his own team in either Olympics, let alone living up to the title as the best player in the world.
He most certainly gets credit for the Golden Gold, as I already said.

As for Kane, he plays in the West and doesn't get to pad his numbers vs teams like the Sens, Isles and Caines.

Its not about Sid being bad, its about him not being great or even very good.
His performances in the Olympics do not help his case and really, for the purpose of this thread, his mediocre performances actually hurt him.

Kane can pad stats against the Oilers, Flames and Jets

 

[bobholly39]

I never once said Crosby was bad, I said he was Mediocre, mostly invisible and just another Canadian player.
That he WASN'T even close to being the best player on even his own team in either Olympics, let alone living up to the title as the best player in the world.
He most certainly gets credit for the Golden Gold, as I already said.

As for Kane, he plays in the West and doesn't get to pad his numbers vs teams like the Sens, Isles and Caines.

Its not about Sid being bad, its about him not being great or even very good.
His performances in the Olympics do not help his case and really, for the purpose of this thread, his mediocre performances actually hurt him.

Hi.

This is probably 5th time in this thread I try to respond to one of your posts - and every single time you conveniently ignore my reply that tears your logic apart. Let's see if attempt #5 is the magic number that generates a response.


Your only anti-Crosby argument in this thread is his record in elimination games. It's like you finally found a stat that makes him look bad, so you're running with it to try and show how "sucky" Crosby is.

12 games, 9 points. Not "bad" per se, but certainly not "all-time great" worthy either at first glance. However, as countless other people have pointed out, it is a very small sample size, and should be a very small part of the overall evaluation of the player's career - not the main and only criteria.

As of age 27, Crosby is ahead of Yzerman. I have no idea why you keep bringing up stats Yzerman has at 37 or 32 years old - we are comparing career pace, and there's nothing Yzerman did before 27 that has him ahead of Crosby, or even close.

If you're so caught up on the importance of elimination games all of a sudden - and by your own admission Yzerman is only 13th so we should look higher up on the totem pole if we want Crosby to reach as high as 3rd, right?? - let's look at Mark Messier instead.

Wasn't Messier ranked #6 all-time in centers? Doesn't he have one of the most impressive playoff records of all at first glance?

Messier, in career elimination games as of age 27:

10 games - 7 points

So I guess since elimination games is the only criteria worth judging a player on according to your logic - Crosby is also ahead of Messier, since Mark Messier sucks at playoffs. So thats put him on pace for top 5, past Messier, right??

 

[Hardyvan123]

At 27 Mikita had won four Art Rosses, 2 Harts, 6 1st Team All-Stars, 1 2nd Team All-Star, 1 Cup. Sid is close, but clearly one step behind.

Trottier had 4 All-Star Teams, 1 Hart, 1 Smythe, 4 Cups. Again Sid is close, but Trottier's two-way game and playoffs put him clearly ahead of Crosby.

Clarke had 3 Harts (in competition with Orr), 2 Cups, 4 All-Star Teams, and two of the best defensive seasons ever. Greater number of Harts and Cups.

Crosby has a chance at surpassing them all with a couple of more seasons as the best player, but he hasn't done it yet.

Seriously no one thinsk less of Orr because he slot 2 of thsoe 3 Harts to clarke, nor should they.

Likewise Crosby has 2 Hart and 2 other seasons were he was fully worthy of the Hart as well but lost very close races due to circumstances (much like how Clarke won 2 Harts due to circumstances not necessarily being better than Orr).

Mikita has the best resume of the 3 guys listed above (both overall and up to age 27) and both Trottier and Clarke add very little after 27, compared to the level Crosby is playing at right now and presumably can carry for another season or 2 if not more one would think.

I don't have the time right now but when I can I will go over each players case more in depth.

 

[Plural]

Seriously no one thinsk less of Orr because he slot 2 of thsoe 3 Harts to clarke, nor should they.

Likewise Crosby has 2 Hart and 2 other seasons were he was fully worthy of the Hart as well but lost very close races due to circumstances (much like how Clarke won 2 Harts due to circumstances not necessarily being better than Orr).

Mikita has the best resume of the 3 guys listed above (both overall and up to age 27) and both Trottier and Clarke add very little after 27, compared to the level Crosby is playing at right now and presumably can carry for another season or 2 if not more one would think.

I don't have the time right now but when I can I will go over each players case more in depth.

Crosby already has 4 seasons where he has finished top-3 in Hart voting. Had he won over Ovechkin in lockout year, nobody would have batted an eye.

His rookie season, Crosby didn't really register in Hart voting. He was 24th with 2 fifth place votes. But he did manage to pull out one of the best rookie seasons in the history. Since expansion, here are the players who have finished top-10 or higher in points in their first year. I'll add the age in too to give some perspective.

Gretzky: Tied for 1st. 19 year old.
Selanne: Tied for 5th. 22 years old.
Peter Stastny: 6th. 24 years old.
Ovechkin: 3rd. 20 years old.
Crosby: 6th. 18 years old.
Bossy: 6th. 21 years old.

That's impressive company and while it might not be high on all-time great seasons. It definitely gives him a head start on most players.

His sophomore season, as everyone knows, Crosby continued his business as usual. He won the scoring race and was voted as the MVP with big margin over Luongo and Brodeur. The next skater in Hart voting was Lecavalier with 5 1st place votes compared to Crosby's 91. I don't think anyone disputes that he was the best player on planet that season. It wasn't exactly an all-time great season in the context of best ever. But it certainly keeps him in the running with all other players than Gretzky.

Third season, Crosby had his ankle injured when he was leading the league in scoring. Now, of course injuries need to matter. But I don't think they should nullify the season in all. Even without injuries I am certain that Ovechkin is the top-dog that season. But 2nd in Hart voting was Malkin who was considerably behind Ovechkin. Crosby was playing bit better than Malkin that season and he deserves some credit for it. So, how much value should that regular season hold for Crosby? In my mind, it proves that he was still one of the top-2/3 players in the league. His play was at level that would have given him serious Hart consideration without injuries.

Fourth season, Crosby finishes 6th in Hart voting and this is probably the only season where he clearly lost on game-by-game basis to his team-mate Malkin. Probably his "worst season" in the sense that had he never been injured his projection would have been higher in every season. Still a good season tough.

Fifth season, Crosby finishes third in Hart voting. I have no problem for Henrik winning the coveted trophy. If there could have been another player taking it, it would have been Ovechkin. Not Crosby. But there is no doubt that Crosby was third best skater that season. He finished with 729 points in Hart voting against the next highest skater, Stamkos, who had 28 points. No contest. A really good season, but not one for the ages.

Sixth season, Crosby kicks it up a notch. He is playing the best hockey of his career and frankly, nobody else is close. He gets injured, but everyone and their mother knows who was the BEST player that year. That season certainly doesn't lift Crosby to the immortal level. It could have, but the injuries got in the way. But people can't treat that season like Crosby was playing the same level as other 66 point scorers. No, Sid was the best player that season.

Seventh season. This is the only season where I see little to no value on all-time level. Would Crosby have been contending for the top-spot without injuries? Most likely. But the sample size is just so small. But it does give us some information. In the games he played, he was as consistent producer as he has always been. Right on leagues top. So, even if that season doesn't add much it certainly does not imply that Crosby could have not been on top level.

Season eight. Again, injury problems. But finishing practically tied for the Hart trophy with Ovechkin and winning the Lindsay is a solid proof that Crosby was the best player on planet that year.

Ninth season. First full season for a long time. Crosby doesn't disappoint. He doesn't manage to tear up the competition as some predicted. But he still manages to prove that when playing all games, there is not many, if any capable of challenging him.

Now, I get that injuries bring down the overall value of his career. But how many players are there who have been playing (when playing) at least on top-3 player level 8 seasons out of first 9? And the one where he is not on top-3 there is a good argument that he is top-10. (Rookie season)

The more I think about it the more it feels like Crosby is going to be ranked really really high in few seasons. We all expect him to dominate the scoring race this season again. If that happens, (fingers crossed) is there really more than 5 guys in the history with better consistency on top-level for first 10 seasons?

 

[Sentinel]

If 27 points and 31 points aren't even close to Smythe-worthy, what is?

Gawd! There is more to hockey than points! Two-way play, leadership, and discipline, for starters. Which is where Crosby loses to Trottier, Messier, Yzerman, Fedorov, and Sakic handily.

 

[bobholly39]

Gawd! There is more to hockey than points! Two-way play, leadership, and discipline, for starters. Which is where Crosby loses to Trottier, Messier, Yzerman, Fedorov, and Sakic handily.

Discipline at age 26

Crosby has 57 penalty minutes in 95 playoff games
Messier has 102 penalty minutes in 100 playoff games
Yzerman has 34 penalty minutes in 50 playoff games
Federov has 57 penalty minutes in 68 playoff games
Trottier has 135 penalty minutes in 117 playoff games
Sakic has 16 penalty minutes in 34 playoff games

Crosby is more "disciplined" than every player you listed, except Sakic - Sakic who has a ridiculously small sample size of 34 games (smallest on list).

Leadership:

Crosby was captain in 2014 in Sochi.
Yzerman/Sakic/Messier never captained a team (let alone a gold medal team) despite playing in olympics. (i'd be pretty surprised if Federov did, but i didn't check)


Crosby became captain of the Penguins at 19 years old. I'm pretty sure that's younger than anyone else you listed? I thnk Yzerman was at 21, and everyone else after that. Crosby has lead his team to success in the season every year since being captain, and success in the playoffs overall (even tho they obviously didn't win in in the playoffs each year). So there's no reason to question his "leadership" skills as he's done pretty good for himself.


To quote your post:

"Two-way play, leadership and discipline for starters!"

Well, Crosby is in first place in 2 out of 3 categories you mentioned. How do you evaluate two-way play? That's a bit more tricky, so i left it off. Still, 2 out of 3 aint bad?

 

[daver]

Gawd! There is more to hockey than points! Two-way play, leadership, and discipline, for starters. Which is where Crosby loses to Trottier, Messier, Yzerman, Fedorov, and Sakic handily.

So then you would take Malkin's Conn Smythe away and give it to Crosby? He was a better two-way player, a better leader and more disciplined.

 

[MXD]

Crosby is actually a pretty good defensive player, so I don't really understand the criticism in that regard. He's miles ahead of Malkin in that regards. Usage charts are particularly eloquent.

Regarding discipline, well, 50 PIMS today isn't exactly the same as 50 PIMS 20 years ago, so I wouldn't use raw numbers to say that Crosby is more disciplines than the players mentioned above.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Leadership:

Crosby was captain in 2014 in Sochi.
Yzerman/Sakic/Messier never captained a team (let alone a gold medal team) despite playing in olympics. (i'd be pretty surprised if Federov did, but i didn't check)

Sakic did. But it is probably best forgotten since Canada laid an egg.

Let's be realistic as well. Yzerman/Messier easily could have too, and Crosby wouldn't be a Team Canada captain when Wayne Gretzky was playing, either.

 

[Beau Knows]

Crosby is actually a pretty good defensive player, so I don't really understand the criticism in that regard. He's miles ahead of Malkin in that regards. Usage charts are particularly eloquent.

Malkin can be really good defensively at times, but Crosby is far more consistent in that area.

 

[bobholly39]

Sakic did. But it is probably best forgotten since Canada laid an egg.

Let's be realistic as well. Yzerman/Messier easily could have too, and Crosby wouldn't be a Team Canada captain when Wayne Gretzky was playing, either.

You're right, I missed that.

it's funny because - i'm not even here trying to unanimously convince everyone that Crosby definitely *is* the better leader than all those other guys.

I'm just trying to refute some of the over-the top claims of posters claiming that Crosby is most certainly *lacking* in leadership vs those other guys, at the same age. At first glance, Crosby actually looks ahead of the pack. He's had way more "leadership-roles" thrust upon him than Yzerman/Messier at similar age, and he's been quite successful in those roles.

 

[blogofmike]

Leadership:

Crosby was captain in 2014 in Sochi.
Yzerman/Sakic/Messier never captained a team (let alone a gold medal team) despite playing in olympics. (i'd be pretty surprised if Federov did, but i didn't check)


Crosby became captain of the Penguins at 19 years old. I'm pretty sure that's younger than anyone else you listed? I thnk Yzerman was at 21, and everyone else after that. Crosby has lead his team to success in the season every year since being captain, and success in the playoffs overall (even tho they obviously didn't win in in the playoffs each year). So there's no reason to question his "leadership" skills as he's done pretty good for himself.

That's a fairly arbitrary way to measure leadership. Almost as if you figured out what Crosby did, decided that was leadership, then decided that should be the measure because Crosby did it.

By this logic, by merely being named "captain" a teenaged Crosby was a better leader than Messier was on the Oilers, where he played with a notable teammate that would likely keep the "C" off of most people's chests.

As for the bolded, which Olympics did Messier play in? Who was captain in 2006?

 

[Hardyvan123]

Crosby already has 4 seasons where he has finished top-3 in Hart voting. Had he won over Ovechkin in lockout year, nobody would have batted an eye.

His rookie season, Crosby didn't really register in Hart voting. He was 24th with 2 fifth place votes. But he did manage to pull out one of the best rookie seasons in the history. Since expansion, here are the players who have finished top-10 or higher in points in their first year. I'll add the age in too to give some perspective.

Gretzky: Tied for 1st. 19 year old.
Selanne: Tied for 5th. 22 years old.
Peter Stastny: 6th. 24 years old.
Ovechkin: 3rd. 20 years old.
Crosby: 6th. 18 years old.
Bossy: 6th. 21 years old.

That's impressive company and while it might not be high on all-time great seasons. It definitely gives him a head start on most players.

His sophomore season, as everyone knows, Crosby continued his business as usual. He won the scoring race and was voted as the MVP with big margin over Luongo and Brodeur. The next skater in Hart voting was Lecavalier with 5 1st place votes compared to Crosby's 91. I don't think anyone disputes that he was the best player on planet that season. It wasn't exactly an all-time great season in the context of best ever. But it certainly keeps him in the running with all other players than Gretzky.

Third season, Crosby had his ankle injured when he was leading the league in scoring. Now, of course injuries need to matter. But I don't think they should nullify the season in all. Even without injuries I am certain that Ovechkin is the top-dog that season. But 2nd in Hart voting was Malkin who was considerably behind Ovechkin. Crosby was playing bit better than Malkin that season and he deserves some credit for it. So, how much value should that regular season hold for Crosby? In my mind, it proves that he was still one of the top-2/3 players in the league. His play was at level that would have given him serious Hart consideration without injuries.

Fourth season, Crosby finishes 6th in Hart voting and this is probably the only season where he clearly lost on game-by-game basis to his team-mate Malkin. Probably his "worst season" in the sense that had he never been injured his projection would have been higher in every season. Still a good season tough.

Fifth season, Crosby finishes third in Hart voting. I have no problem for Henrik winning the coveted trophy. If there could have been another player taking it, it would have been Ovechkin. Not Crosby. But there is no doubt that Crosby was third best skater that season. He finished with 729 points in Hart voting against the next highest skater, Stamkos, who had 28 points. No contest. A really good season, but not one for the ages.

Sixth season, Crosby kicks it up a notch. He is playing the best hockey of his career and frankly, nobody else is close. He gets injured, but everyone and their mother knows who was the BEST player that year. That season certainly doesn't lift Crosby to the immortal level. It could have, but the injuries got in the way. But people can't treat that season like Crosby was playing the same level as other 66 point scorers. No, Sid was the best player that season.

Seventh season. This is the only season where I see little to no value on all-time level. Would Crosby have been contending for the top-spot without injuries? Most likely. But the sample size is just so small. But it does give us some information. In the games he played, he was as consistent producer as he has always been. Right on leagues top. So, even if that season doesn't add much it certainly does not imply that Crosby could have not been on top level.

Season eight. Again, injury problems. But finishing practically tied for the Hart trophy with Ovechkin and winning the Lindsay is a solid proof that Crosby was the best player on planet that year.

Ninth season. First full season for a long time. Crosby doesn't disappoint. He doesn't manage to tear up the competition as some predicted. But he still manages to prove that when playing all games, there is not many, if any capable of challenging him.

Now, I get that injuries bring down the overall value of his career. But how many players are there who have been playing (when playing) at least on top-3 player level 8 seasons out of first 9? And the one where he is not on top-3 there is a good argument that he is top-10. (Rookie season)

The more I think about it the more it feels like Crosby is going to be ranked really really high in few seasons. We all expect him to dominate the scoring race this season again. If that happens, (fingers crossed) is there really more than 5 guys in the history with better consistency on top-level for first 10 seasons?

Basically this, only 2 guys jump out fo the gate this elite or well, only health is going to hold him back.

 

[K Fleur]

Gawd! There is more to hockey than points! Two-way play, leadership, and discipline, for starters. Which is where Crosby loses to Trottier, Messier, Yzerman, Fedorov, and Sakic handily.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people other than yourself claiming Fedorov to be a "leader". Hard to lead when you're holding out.

 

[thegoldenyear]

Hi.

This is probably 5th time in this thread I try to respond to one of your posts - and every single time you conveniently ignore my reply that tears your logic apart. Let's see if attempt #5 is the magic number that generates a response.


Your only anti-Crosby argument in this thread is his record in elimination games. It's like you finally found a stat that makes him look bad, so you're running with it to try and show how "sucky" Crosby is.

12 games, 9 points. Not "bad" per se, but certainly not "all-time great" worthy either at first glance. However, as countless other people have pointed out, it is a very small sample size, and should be a very small part of the overall evaluation of the player's career - not the main and only criteria.

As of age 27, Crosby is ahead of Yzerman. I have no idea why you keep bringing up stats Yzerman has at 37 or 32 years old - we are comparing career pace, and there's nothing Yzerman did before 27 that has him ahead of Crosby, or even close.

If you're so caught up on the importance of elimination games all of a sudden - and by your own admission Yzerman is only 13th so we should look higher up on the totem pole if we want Crosby to reach as high as 3rd, right?? - let's look at Mark Messier instead.

Wasn't Messier ranked #6 all-time in centers? Doesn't he have one of the most impressive playoff records of all at first glance?

Messier, in career elimination games as of age 27:

10 games - 7 points

So I guess since elimination games is the only criteria worth judging a player on according to your logic - Crosby is also ahead of Messier, since Mark Messier sucks at playoffs. So thats put him on pace for top 5, past Messier, right??

I'm not a big Crosby fan - it's a team issue, mostly (allegiances/rivalries die hard) - but I for one am getting some value out of your arguments and really appreciate the effort expended. Thanks for that. Learning is good.

Just wanted to drop a comment about sample size for elimination games. I doubt it's that large for most past elites. Teams seem to claw back from 0-3 and 1-3 deficits more nowadays, which might be where Yahoo!'s controversial Sid stat-grab originated. Sid's 12-game sample through his age 26 season is maybe even fairly high because he's been on a playoff perennial.

FWIW, PITT's 6-6 record in Sid-era e-games seems pretty solid to me. I looked at Wayne's records, and his Oilers went 5-5. He only played 10 by the end of his age 26 season.

**

For the curious, and because Gretzky numbers always fascinate as best- or near-best performance models, here's his stat line in e-games (I could provide logs, but I think it's off-topic for this post):

EDM 10GP 3G 11A 14PTS
LAK 9GP 8G 8A 16PTS
STL 1GP 0G 0A 0PTS
NYR 1GP 0G 2A 2PTS

CAREER 21GP 11G 21A 32PTS
IN WINS 10GP 8G 11A 21PTS
IN LOSS 11GP 3A 8A 11PTS

Did rather nicely with the Kings - he had three three-point e-games in 1989 alone.

 

[Sentinel]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people other than yourself claiming Fedorov to be a "leader". Hard to lead when you're holding out.

He was an undisputed leader at the 2008 WHC, bringing Russia its first gold in 15 years.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

At 27 Mikita had won four Art Rosses, 2 Harts, 6 1st Team All-Stars, 1 2nd Team All-Star, 1 Cup. Sid is close, but clearly one step behind.

Trottier had 4 All-Star Teams, 1 Hart, 1 Smythe, 4 Cups. Again Sid is close, but Trottier's two-way game and playoffs put him clearly ahead of Crosby.

Clarke had 3 Harts (in competition with Orr), 2 Cups, 4 All-Star Teams, and two of the best defensive seasons ever. Greater number of Harts and Cups.

Crosby has a chance at surpassing them all with a couple of more seasons as the best player, but he hasn't done it yet.

The thing with crosby is that some players win awards due to injuries. Crosby has won every award he has minus his art Ross by actually winning them with perfect context.

He won both his art rosses while being 1st in ppg.

All 3 of his lindsays he was the most outstanding player easily. Same with his harts.

He had 3 seasons where he was the undisputed best 06-07 12-13 13-14

3 seasons where he was a top 3 player 07-08 08-09 09-10

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Age 27

2 harts
2 art Ross
3 lindsays
1 Richard
3 first team all star
1 assist title
1 playoff scoring title