If Crosby retired before the start of '19/20, is he a top 10 ALLTIME player?

[Midnight Judges]

I'm pretty sure I'd have Crosby and Ovie in my top 10 if the world exploded right now.

Seems to me they are well on their way to carving out a clear cut second tier where they didn't have clear domination on Orr/Lemieux/Gretzky/Howe levels but domination that is a clear cut above anyone else.

I really don't even know if they have to do anything more, although IMO having a handful of more productive seasons makes that assessment a little more firm.

 

[CupofOil]

The guy has nearly played twice as many games as Crosby. Unless you're an Orr/Lemieux level talent, that just can't be sloughed aside like it's nothing.

Just because he played more games, that doesn't mean he was a better player.
Sorry but Messier over Crosby is silly talk. The only thing Messier has on Crosby is that he played more games. Crosby is a better player in every single aspect.

 

[Midnight Judges]

The only thing Messier has on Crosby is that he played more games. Crosby was a better player in every single aspect.

I'd put Crosby easily ahead, but you go too far here.

Messier is clearly superior physically, defensively, and if cup counting is your thing (it's not mine) obviously Messier does well there too.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Just because he played more games, that doesn't mean he was a better player.
Sorry but Messier over Crosby is silly talk. The only thing Messier has on Crosby is that he played more games. Crosby is a better player in every single aspect.

I updated the post but will put it here as well.

Messier dipped below a point per game in his last 7 seasons and he was 37 at the start of that.

Before: 1,552 points in 1,272 games

After: 335 point in 484 games

Crosby is currently 32 this season with a total of 1,216 points in 943 games. The body of work isn't even comparable at this point. And that's what it is, and argument about the two right now.

 

[CupofOil]

I'd put Crosby easily ahead, but you go too far here.

Messier is clearly superior physically, defensively, and if cup counting is your thing (it's not mine) obviously Messier does well there too.

Better defensively? Eh, Crosby has been one of the better defensive forwards for years. I'd say that they are pretty comparable defensively so I'll retract the Crosby is clearly better defensively statement.

Crosby didn't throw flying elbows like Messier but he's a tank physically and does a lot of his work in the trenches protecting the puck like a demon and welcoming the physicality. I'd say that they were both physical but in different ways.

 

[nowhereman]

I like how anyone who puts Crosby in their top 10 is "forgetting how many great players there were". Outside of the big 4, you can't confidently say that Crosby is clearly inferior to any of the other legends. He's right there with Beliveau, Hull and Richard. Both him and OV are top 10.

 

[CupofOil]

I updated the post but will put it here as well.

Messier dipped below a point per game in his last 7 seasons and he was 37 at the start of that.

Before: 1,552 points in 1,272 games

After: 335 point in 484 games

Crosby is currently 32 this season with a total of 1,216 points in 943 games. The body of work isn't even comparable at this point. And that's what it is, and argument about the two right now.

Messier played in one of the highest scoring eras of all time throughout most of his prime while most of Crosby's career took place in Dead Puck Era part two.
Crosby and Ovechkin for that matter would have put up absurd numbers in the 80s and early 90s. Probably some 140-150+ point seasons and 60+ goal seasons or in Ovi's case, I bet he would have had an 80 goal season or two.

 

[bobholly39]

I updated the post but will put it here as well.

Messier dipped below a point per game in his last 7 seasons and he was 37 at the start of that.

Before: 1,552 points in 1,272 games

After: 335 point in 484 games

Crosby is currently 32 this season with a total of 1,216 points in 943 games. The body of work isn't even comparable at this point. And that's what it is, and argument about the two right now.

So Messier has a lower ppg (in just his prime, not the last 7 years) than Crosby in a much higher scoring era. I'm confused - weren't you trying to argue for Messier above Crosby? I guess numbers don't lie.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Messier played in one of the highest scoring eras of all time throughout most of his prime while most of Crosby's career took place in Dead Puck Era part two.
Crosby and Ovechkin for that matter would have put up absurd numbers in the 80s and early 90s.

I'm not even arguing that, I'm just saying that even if Crosby was better up until 31 than Messier was, there's so much more to account for. You're literally just erasing half of Messier's career by doing this comparison.

 

[Yackiberg8]

1.Gretzky
2.Orr
3.Howe
4.Jagr
5.Shore
6.Hull
7.Harvey
8.Hasek
9.Lemieux
10.Messier

Not even close

Quite the list, Jagr ahead of Lemieux? Wow.

 

[bobholly39]

I'm not even arguing that, I'm just saying that even if Crosby was better up until 31 than Messier was, there's so much more to account for. You're literally just erasing half of Messier's career by doing this comparison.

There is some logic to that. But if longevity is such an important criteria for you - you can use the same logic to argue Lidstrom or Bourque above Orr, which i'm guessing you don't.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Better defensively? Eh, Crosby has been one of the better defensive forwards for years.

yeah not really. Crosby has never shut down an elite offensive player in the playoff series, he barely PK's, he's actually on the ice for lots of goals against, and his team deploys him primarily for offense to the point where his offensive zone starts are actually higher than Ovechkin's in some seasons.

The Canadian media started claiming Crosby was good at defense right when his offense fell off. It's more media narrative than reality.

 

[Trap Jesus]

There is some logic to that. But if longevity is such an important criteria for you - you can use the same logic to argue Lidstrom or Bourque above Orr, which i'm guessing you don't.

Crosby isn't on that level though, guys like Orr and Lemieux were just absurdly ahead of the pack, which Crosby isn't. While Crosby was considered the best player in the league for ~10 years, he was constantly in battles with other players for the best on a year-to-year basis, whereas a guy like Orr was just lapping the field.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Crosby didn't throw flying elbows like Messier but he's a tank physically ....

Ovechkin, Messier, Hull, and Howe - all relevant to this thread - are all exponentially more physical than Crosby. Not close.

Bizarre to hear anyone call Crosby a tank. He's far more on the finesse side of things.

 

[CupofOil]

I'm not even arguing that, I'm just saying that even if Crosby was better up until 31 than Messier was, there's so much more to account for. You're literally just erasing half of Messier's career by doing this comparison.

Your only argument for picking Messier over Crosby is longevity and pure numbers based on longevity.
The question is who is the better player, not who put up more numbers over a longer period of time.
For me, and I'm sure most people, Crosby is a better player than Messier even if he retired today.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Crosby isn't on that level though, guys like Orr and Lemieux were just absurdly ahead of the pack, which Crosby isn't. While Crosby was considered the best player in the league for ~10 years, he was constantly in battles with other players for the best on a year-to-year basis, whereas a guy like Orr was just lapping the field.

Somebody should have told the Hart and Pearson voters from Bobby Orr's time.

Apparently they didn't get the message.

 

[Midnight Judges]

The question is who is the better player, not who put up more numbers over a longer period of time.

That's not right. The poll is "top" not "better."

Anyway, it's the greatest that matters.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Your only argument for picking Messier over Crosby is longevity and pure numbers based on longevity.
The question is who is the better player, not who put up more numbers over a longer period of time.
For me, and I'm sure most people, Crosby is a better player than Messier even if he retired today.

I don't argue for a second that Crosby was the better player than Messier up to the age he is right now, but I don't even think they can be properly compared when you consider that this point was just halfway through Messier's career. The difference between the two isn't nearly enough to make up for that entire half of Messier's career. Twice as many games, do you know how insane of a difference that is?

 

[CupofOil]

Ovechkin, Messier, Hull, and Howe - all relevant to this thread - are all exponentially more physical than Crosby. Not close.

Bizarre to hear anyone call Crosby a tank. He's far more on the finesse side of things.

Physicality is not just about throwing hits. Crosby has plenty of finesse in his game but he also plays in the trenches a lot absorbing tons of punishment, dishing a lot out and coming out ahead most times.

McDavid is a purely finesse player, Gretzky was a finesse player, Crosby is a mixture of both finesse and physical. Crosby is a tank, he's built like an ox in his lower body (the guy has tree trunks for legs) and is well known for being one of the best puck protectors in the game. You don't know this?

 

[Trap Jesus]

Somebody should have told the Hart and Pearson voters from Bobby Orr's time.

Apparently they didn't get the message.

Are we going to talk about the Hart in a Crosby Top 10 thread? We can definitely do that.

 

[The Macho King]

Borderline, but he falls short for me.

 

[The Macho King]

I'd put Crosby easily ahead, but you go too far here.

Messier is clearly superior physically, defensively, and if cup counting is your thing (it's not mine) obviously Messier does well there too.

This myth that Messier was something special defensively has to stop. He was fine defensively. Just fine.

 

[CupofOil]

I don't argue for a second that Crosby was the better player than Messier up to the age he is right now, but I don't even think they can be properly compared when you consider that this point was just halfway through Messier's career. The difference between the two isn't nearly enough to make up for that entire half of Messier's career. Twice as many games, do you know how insane of a difference that is?

Messier finished top 3 in Hart voting 3 times in 25 years while Crosby did 7 times in 13 years and was #5 and #6 two other times while Messier only finished top 10 four times in his entire career.
Just on that alone, you can see that Crosby is the far more accomplished player. Crosby accomplished more in half his career than Messier did in his whole career.

 

[K Fleur]

I updated the post but will put it here as well.

Messier dipped below a point per game in his last 7 seasons and he was 37 at the start of that.

Before: 1,552 points in 1,272 games

After: 335 point in 484 games

Crosby is currently 32 this season with a total of 1,216 points in 943 games. The body of work isn't even comparable at this point. And that's what it is, and argument about the two right now.

It is important to consider that Messier’s entire prime occurred during the highest scoring time period in the history of the NHL.

Crosby’s did not.

 

[High five Tom]

Easily.