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

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


  • Total voters
    216

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
13,491
10,046
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.

The primary physical punishment Crosby dishes out is in the form of illegally slashing guys on the hands and not getting called for it.
 

heilongjetsfan

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
3,591
1,578
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.
You make a good argument, and I agree that Crosby is the better player, but if you're ranking goats, total career accomplishments are definitely a factor. I never liked Messier and I think a lot of his numbers are inflated by teams trying to defend against Gretzky, but even still, his longevity is a factor in and of itself.

It's a big part of the reason nobody would ever consider Lindros a top 10.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
80,407
78,003
Redmond, WA
Crosby has an incredibly similar career to Guy Lafleur already, so I really don't know how someone can say that Lafleur is top-10 but Crosby isn't. Here's their trophy cases and resumes:

Lafleur:

-560 goals and 1353 points in 1126 games
-5 Cups
-3 Art Ross trophies
-3 Pearson trophies
-2 Hart trophies
-1 "Richard" trophy (didn't exist then but he would have won 1)
-1 Conn Smythe

Crosby:

-446 goals and 1216 points in 943 games
-3 Cups
-3 Pearson/Lindsay trophies
-2 Art Ross trpohies
-2 Hart trophies
-2 Conn Smythes
-2 Richard trophies

In Lafleur's first 13 seasons, his production (1241 points in 942 games) is very similar to Crosby's production (1216 points in 943 games) and his resume is incredibly comparable. You can't have Lafleur in your top-10 without Crosby, that's straight up nostalgia talking. If Crosby retired right now, he's on the same level as Lafleur, Mikita and Jagr.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SillyRabbit

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,247
10,127
Nope.

Orr
Gretzky
Howe
Lemieux
Hasek
Roy
Bourque
Esposito
Lafleur
Jagr

Off the top of my head, no particular order

Sorry but Esposito isn't even a top center of all time nevermind top 10 of all position.

Lafleur is out of place here as well.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,247
10,127
Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Messier
Orr, Lidstrom, Bourque, Harvey, Shore
Hasek

I don't see an argument for Crosby over any of those guys. Even if you want to dismiss super old players like Shore or Harvey, there are still guys like Yzerman, Sakic and Roy in recent years. I think it's safe to project Crosby beyond those centers, but a big argument for them is longevity. There are 6-8 more seasons those two have on Crosby right now and it shouldn't be discounted.

There is something to be said for the career argument but Crosby hit the ground running and was a Hart finalist last year in his 14th year.

Many of the other guys mentioned don't have elite level of play in their 12, 13 and 14th seasons.

Crosby has had an elite level for all of his 14 seasons.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,247
10,127
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.

Alot of this is inaccurate and also a false narrative of what a good 200 foot player looks like.

The Canadian bias is particularly amusing.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,589
Crosby has an incredibly similar career to Guy Lafleur already, so I really don't know how someone can say that Lafleur is top-10 but Crosby isn't. Here's their trophy cases and resumes:

Lafleur:

-560 goals and 1353 points in 1126 games
-5 Cups
-3 Art Ross trophies
-3 Pearson trophies
-2 Hart trophies
-1 "Richard" trophy (didn't exist then but he would have won 1)
-1 Conn Smythe

Crosby:

-446 goals and 1216 points in 943 games
-3 Cups
-3 Pearson/Lindsay trophies
-2 Art Ross trpohies
-2 Hart trophies
-2 Conn Smythes
-2 Richard trophies

In Lafleur's first 13 seasons, his production (1241 points in 942 games) is very similar to Crosby's production (1216 points in 943 games) and his resume is incredibly comparable. You can't have Lafleur in your top-10 without Crosby, that's straight up nostalgia talking. If Crosby retired right now, he's on the same level as Lafleur, Mikita and Jagr.

If you're trying to argue that Crosby is top 10 and if your argument hinges on "he's just like Lafleur and Mikita" - you're doing it wrong. Lafleur and Mikita are more like top 20-25 all time. On the recent top 100 project on the history section, Lafleur got voted in 23, Mikita 24, which is right where they should be. Crosby is above both of them. Jagr is above both of them too, but probably not top 10 either, though closer.

The usual "top 10" names are Beliveau, Hull, Roy, Hasek, Bourque, Harvey, etc. That's who you need to compare Crosby to to decide if he should be top 10 or not.
 

Incognito

Registered User
Oct 18, 2008
6,430
2,955
Toronto, Ontario
There are only four players in the history of hockey that are clearly and unquestionably ahead of Crosby, and we all know who they are. Given this, I'd say that Crosby would definitely be a top ten player of all-time if he retired before the start of the 2019-2020 season. Ditto for Ovechkin.
 

Krewe

Registered User
Mar 12, 2019
1,676
1,917
people need to take off their nostalgia/high-scoring glasses. How can anybody honestly argue that the best player over the last 15 years is not a top 10 all time? Do you really believe that players pre-2004 were so much better (spoiler alert, they weren’t). The NHL has been around just over 100 years. So on average a top 10 player should in theory come around every 10ish years. Listing a bunch of players from the 80s and early 90s is just getting distracted by the points and lack of parity
 
  • Like
Reactions: SillyRabbit

Ace Card Bedard

Back in Black, Red, and White
Feb 11, 2012
8,724
3,569
Crosby is on his way to the top 10 in my opinion but he hasn't even reached 1000 games yet.
Give him time to complete his career.

I don't think you can rank him above guys who maintained such a high level for 1500 games or more.

Ron Francis for example.
 

KoozNetsOff 92

Hala Madrid
Apr 6, 2016
8,567
8,229
Depends on what you value the most, but I can see the argument for Crosby being anywhere from 5-20. Personally I have him behind Gretzky, Orr, Howe, Lemieux and Hasek (can't see him doing anything to change this) but then interchangeable with OV, Jagr, Hull, Beliveau, Bourque and Roy so somewhere from 6-12. Anyone still bringing up guys like Sakic and Yzerman is delusional, Crosby is clearly ahead of them.
 

Ace Card Bedard

Back in Black, Red, and White
Feb 11, 2012
8,724
3,569
Anyone still bringing up guys like Sakic and Yzerman is delusional, Crosby is clearly ahead of them.

Why?
I think there's a good argument for it.

For example:

Sakic - 19 GWG in the playoffs vs 9 for Crosby
8 of those were in OT vs 1 for Crosby

And Sakic maintained his elite level of play until around 40 years of age.

I expect Crosby to pass them up by the time he's done but at this point I put him right around that Yzerman/Sakic tier of players. One of the greats of his generation.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,247
10,127
Crosby is on his way to the top 10 in my opinion but he hasn't even reached 1000 games yet.
Give him time to complete his career.

I don't think you can rank him above guys who maintained such a high level for 1500 games or more.

Ron Francis for example.

Are you arguing that Francis is even close to Crosby all time?:help:
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,247
10,127
Why?
I think there's a good argument for it.

For example:

Sakic - 19 GWG in the playoffs vs 9 for Crosby
8 of those were in OT vs 1 for Crosby

And Sakic maintained his elite level of play until around 40 years of age.

I expect Crosby to pass them up by the time he's done but at this point I put him right around that Yzerman/Sakic tier of players. One of the greats of his generation.

Crosby is well past Sakic already.

Joe had years that he was merely quite good to very good.

People put too much stock into that last 100 point season as he wasn't doing that every year even in his prime.
 

Merrrlin

Grab the 9 iron, Barry!
Jul 2, 2019
6,768
6,925
people need to take off their nostalgia/high-scoring glasses. How can anybody honestly argue that the best player over the last 15 years is not a top 10 all time? Do you really believe that players pre-2004 were so much better (spoiler alert, they weren’t). The NHL has been around just over 100 years. So on average a top 10 player should in theory come around every 10ish years. Listing a bunch of players from the 80s and early 90s is just getting distracted by the points and lack of parity

Great post, agree entirely.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
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 are only four players you can say were better up until age 31 without question, let alone a borderline Top 20ish player all-time.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Has the most Top 3 Art Ross finishes/ Hart nominations in NHL history besides Wayne and Howe.

Has the best playoff resume of his era.

What else do you need to know?
 

JasonRoseEh

Registered User
Oct 23, 2018
2,933
2,346
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.
My argument is that it's impossible in the modern era to have that level of domination displayed by the NHL's golden era of superstars. There isn't the time with the puck or space to do it, everything proves this and this is why nostalgia just murders fans ability to put modern players into proper perspective.

You hear it all the time even with former players. Recently they had a guy on Spittin Chiclets who brought up "How many guys do you even see get 50 now?" as some proof that today's goal scorer's aren't as good as previous eras. Zero correction from the interviewers or perspective to what's changed in the game, just a guy spouting raw totals from an era where most players smoked a pack of darts a day and goalies couldn't stop 50mph dribblers.
 

JasonRoseEh

Registered User
Oct 23, 2018
2,933
2,346
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.
Crosby is a better player than Messier, I don't care what the totals say. So is Ovechkin for that matter and I'm a huge fan of the Moose.
 

Luigi Lemieux

Registered User
Sep 26, 2003
21,440
9,062
Crosby is on his way to the top 10 in my opinion but he hasn't even reached 1000 games yet.
Give him time to complete his career.

I don't think you can rank him above guys who maintained such a high level for 1500 games or more.

Ron Francis for example.
He passed Ron Francis by age 24. Peak matters way more than longevity. Unless you think Francis is better than Lemieux too?
 

bambamcam4ever

107 and counting
Feb 16, 2012
14,303
6,344
Why?
I think there's a good argument for it.

For example:

Sakic - 19 GWG in the playoffs vs 9 for Crosby
8 of those were in OT vs 1 for Crosby

And Sakic maintained his elite level of play until around 40 years of age.

I expect Crosby to pass them up by the time he's done but at this point I put him right around that Yzerman/Sakic tier of players. One of the greats of his generation.
Lol. He's the best player to enter the league in the last 35 years.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->