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

[The Panther]

Crosby was IMO, ahead of Malkin for the Conn going into the Finals in 09 but Malkin clearly earned it when all was said and done.

I agree Malkin earned it, but I disagree that Crosby was ahead going into the Finals. Malkin's most dominant performance was against Carolina in the 3rd round sweep. In that Conference Final series, Crosby went:
2G 5A 7PTS +6

Quite great, but then check Malkin's stats:
6G 3A 9PTS +5


Crosby certainly had a Conn Smythe-worthy playoff in 2009. There's no doubt about it. But the award usually -- and correctly -- goes to the player who was more dominant in the Finals and/or as the playoffs progressed. Crosby was more dominant against Washington in the second round; Malkin much more so against Carolina and Malkin somewhat so against Detroit. So, Malkin deserved it.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree Malkin earned it, but I disagree that Crosby was ahead going into the Finals. Malkin's most dominant performance was against Carolina in the 3rd round sweep. In that Conference Final series, Crosby went:
2G 5A 7PTS +6

Quite great, but then check Malkin's stats:
6G 3A 9PTS +5


Crosby certainly had a Conn Smythe-worthy playoff in 2009. There's no doubt about it. But the award usually -- and correctly -- goes to the player who was more dominant in the Finals and/or as the playoffs progressed. Crosby was more dominant against Washington in the second round; Malkin much more so against Carolina and Malkin somewhat so against Detroit. So, Malkin deserved it.

Beating up on a weak team in a sweep more than Crosby doesn't prove you're the MVP. It could be argued that the Carolina series should be the least relevant in determining who the MVP is.

Scoring 7 points in the two blowout games that the team would have easily won without him, is what apparently gives Malkin the "better" series and the "better" playoffs - think about that.

 

[Stephen]

Crosby, individually, is most likely going to put up a better resume than Beliveau, Messier, Morenz, Mikita, Esposito, Sakic, Yzerman, etc.

He will probably win more hardware than any of them.

He will lack Stanley Cups compared to some of them though.

But people need to realize that it is MUCH MORE DIFFICULT to rack up multiple Stanley Cups in today's NHL than it was in the eras that the others played in.

First, Crosby is playing in an era that has a salary-cap. Guys like Sakic and Yzerman won multiple Stanley Cups, but the Avalanche and Red Wings used to spend a lot more than average teams. There is no way those rosters could be constructed in today's NHL.

Second, the league is 30 teams now. Beliveau won 10 Stanley Cups. But he played in a 6-team NHL, where you had a 16.67% chance of winning any given year. And he played on a completely stacked Canadiens team that had half the roster filled with players in the Hall of Fame.

Stanley Cups were always difficult to win, but elite players in Crosby's age group and younger (Doughty, Toews, Kane) have done a better job winning multiple cups.

 

[The Panther]

Beating up on a weak team in a sweep more than Crosby doesn't prove you're the MVP.

I didn't say it did. I said, the player with the better performance later in the playoffs, with emphasis of course on the Final series, usually (and in my view, correctly) determines who is the winner of the Conn Smythe.

In the 3rd round, Malkin was better than Crosby (if the stats don't convince you, listen to what his teammates say about him in the Pens' 2009 Stanley Cup video).

In the Final, Malkin was also a bit better than Crosby (in my memory, and apparently in the eyes of most voters -- I can't be bothered to find the stat-line right now).

Therefore, in the Finals, Malkin was better.
In the 3rd round Malkin was better.

Clearly then, Malkin deserved the Conn Smythe.

As I also said, Crosby played (and certainly produced) well enough to win it, but Malkin was that little but significant bit better.

It could be argued that the Carolina series should be the least relevant in determining who the MVP is.

It could also be argued that Coco-Pebbles are better for kids than organic Granola. And so what? This comment is also insulting to the 'Canes, who were a 97-point team that year. Malkin sliced through them like butter.

 

[K Fleur]

Stanley Cups were always difficult to win, but elite players in Crosby's age group and younger (Doughty, Toews, Kane) have done a better job winning multiple cups.

Congratulations to them for being on great teams.

Just to illustrate the gap between Crosby and these players, none of those players have much chance at being considered top 15 all time at their respective positions. Crosby does. Hell some people have him ranked there already.

 

[daver]

I agree Malkin earned it, but I disagree that Crosby was ahead going into the Finals. Malkin's most dominant performance was against Carolina in the 3rd round sweep. In that Conference Final series, Crosby went:
2G 5A 7PTS +6

Quite great, but then check Malkin's stats:
6G 3A 9PTS +5


Crosby certainly had a Conn Smythe-worthy playoff in 2009. There's no doubt about it. But the award usually -- and correctly -- goes to the player who was more dominant in the Finals and/or as the playoffs progressed. Crosby was more dominant against Washington in the second round; Malkin much more so against Carolina and Malkin somewhat so against Detroit. So, Malkin deserved it.

Crosby was brilliant in the most hyped and toughest series in their 2009 run, he was favoured (as far I can recall) after 3 rounds and deservedly so with 14 goals thru 17 games. There's no way in hell Malkin gets the Smythe after the Carolina series especially when you add in leadership and two-way play.

 

[Plural]

Crosby was brilliant in the most hyped and toughest series in their 2009 run, he was favoured (as far I can recall) after 3 rounds and deservedly so with 14 goals thru 17 games. There's no way in hell Malkin gets the Smythe after the Carolina series especially when you add in leadership and two-way play.

Agreed, after three series nobody is thinking about the Conn Smythe. But Crosby was effectively tied with Malkin at that point. I really have no problem with Malkin winning it. But Crosby gets almost criminally underrated for his two final appearances, with one cup. Heck, there is more than handful of upper echelon Hall of Famers who can't match either of Crosby's two best playoff runs. That's two playoff records that are good enough to match against the best of them.

 

[daver]

Datsyuk missed the first 4 games of the 09 finals. In the three games Datsyuk played Malkin had 0 goals 1 assist a 0+/- and 8 PIM. So yes he clearly overcame an absent Datsyuk.

Funny how the only reason this is brought up is to try to bring Crosby down further. Malkin universally gets credit for winning the CS while only some acknowledge that Detriot's gameplan was to shutdown Crosby and that he was really only ineffective after game 4.

Perhaps the shine on Malkin's CS comes off a bit when you realize he did not have either of the two of the very best defensive forwards in the game on him for the first 5 games.

 

[Sentinel]

Congratulations to them for being on great teams.

Just to illustrate the gap between Crosby and these players, none of those players have much chance at being considered top 15 all time at their respective positions. Crosby does. Hell some people have him ranked there already.

These players MAKE their teams great. On paper, Pittsburgh's roster is every bit as potent as Kings, Bruins, and Hawks. It's just that those teams somehow come up big and playoffs, and Sid's Pens somehow don't.

 

[Sentinel]

Funny how the only reason this is brought up is to try to bring Crosby down further. Malkin universally gets credit for winning the CS while only some acknowledge that Detriot's gameplan was to shutdown Crosby and that he was really only ineffective after game 4.

Perhaps the shine on Malkin's CS comes off a bit when you realize he did not have either of the two of the very best defensive forwards in the game on him for the first 5 games.

So you agree that two-way play of Datsyuk and Zetterberg is more instrumental to winning the Cup than offensive skills of Crosby? Thank you, my point exactly.

FWIW no way in hell Pens win that Cup with healthy Dats (and the rest of the team not on its last legs from injuries), making Sid a career choker.

 

[bobholly39]

So you agree that two-way play of Datsyuk and Zetterberg is more instrumental to winning the Cup than offensive skills of Crosby? Thank you, my point exactly.

FWIW no way in hell Pens win that Cup with healthy Dats (and the rest of the team not on its last legs from injuries), making Sid a career choker.

In this magic, injury-free world, Sidney Crosby just won 4 Harts/Art Ross combos for the past 4 seasons in a row, quite easily so too.

Good luck convincing anyone that injuries somehow "helped" Crosby's career.

 

[Fugu]

I think I got lost and thought I was on the History of Hockey board.

I can't tell the difference between this thread and the usual NHL Talk debates about Crosby.

Hopefully someone answered the question posed in the OP.