If the Top 100 players All-time list is redone today, where does McDavid's career place him?

[Rengorlex]

Re: competition. McDavid is playing against a line with two 100 point scorers and a Selke finalist which dominated ES goal differential more than anything seen since Gretzky's lines in the 80s Oilers. CGY was the 3rd best defensive team in the regular season. Dunno if there's any legitimate reason to devalue his opponents.

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

So this is how it must have been watching peak Gretzky/Mario/Orr.

Not quite: I saw them all, and he's one rung below. He has potential to make the Top 5, and is the most impressive talent to emerge in this century, no doubt.

To answer the OP:

Apart from lack of time, one of the reasons I chose not to participate in the Top 100 projects is because I don't like the idea of ranking active players against retired players. Generally I think a proper comparative career evaluation can only be done post retirement to avoid the pitfalls around "current hype bias." It also gives us a better chance to move through a specific era into a new one, compare eras and take that into consideration. When Crosby came into the league, since the moment he stepped onto the ice there were people vaulting him ahead of Gretzky before he accomplished anything. The young pups on the main boards made arguments like "everybody who plays now is better than everybody who played in the past." A decade and a half later it's easier for people to see that we weren't in some golden age of hockey at that point, and that somebody like McDavid can come along and show more skill than Crosby, but still not measure up to Gretzky or Lemieux.

I want to see a couple of deep playoff runs and a larger point spread for a couple of more years clearly separating him from his peers before I'd comfortably consider him as a challenger for a Top 5 spot.

 

[Iron Mike Sharpe]

How many HHOF greatest goalies and greatest defensemen are in the game today? The quality of opposition is driven more by coaching strategy these days than by player excellence.

It is a totally different game today than the 1990s. That is obvious to us in our fifties.

To be clear: A Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman and Messier played against the likes of Bourque, Lidstrom, Roy & Hasek, as well as Pronger, MacInnis, Stevens, Brodeur,... today's crew is more Belfour and Niedermayer kind of defending. HHOFers, but a tier or two below. The era is different.

This. Absolutely.

 

[Gurglesons]

I mean, the '09 Penguins were no prize either...that's not the formula for success, it was just Crosby, Malkin, Gonchar, and Fleury (yes, Fleury - who only had one bad series in that run, after a Smythe-worthy run the year before) willed us there.

The Oilers shape up like this basically...
Streak n' score top-six winger - Best player on planet - German Gretzky
Complementary winger - 2C - 3RW
3/4LW - 4C - 2/3RW
4RW - 4C - 4RW

Low IQ 4D - 6D
Old 5/6D - Young, Low IQ 4D
6D - 2/3/4D

Old, inconsistent 1B/2
Fringe NHLer

That defense is ghastly and the goaltending is unreliable. Their execution shows that.

##

The '09 Penguins were:

Complementary winger - Best player on planet - Old top 6 winger
3LW - Russian Lemieux - 4C
3LW - 2C - 3RW
4LW - 4C - 2/3RW

4D - 1D
6D - Young 3D (soon 1D)
6D - 6D

1G
2G

The key difference with the Penguins is the lack of low IQ players. Really, just Kennedy was far below the mark on hockey sense - he was easy to insulate and with only one poor IQ player on the rink at any one time, it's easy to figure out for teammates.

Meanwhile, Bouchard and Nurse being on the rink for most of the game is unreal to watch...that's probably why 97 has to try to go coast to coast so much, I wouldn't trust most of that Oilers defense to get me a glass of water...

I look at this Oilers roster as more parallel with the '01 Penguins...

- Two superstars.
- One unpredictable, but very talented winger.
- Quality second line pieces.
- Very unreliable depth pieces that are designed to just go out there and hold on for dear life while 97 gets a drink.
- A generally inept defense, where no great combination of players can even get you to 30 sound minutes, much less 60

Also, this team featured the rarity of forwards out pacing their D in ATOI. 97 leads this team in ATOI. Drai would be there too if he didn't get hurt.
- A goalie who is cold a little more than he is hot

I think you are underselling Mike Smith. He’s got a .939 in playoffs in his career. He’s old, but he’s been damn good when it matters in his career.

Also Fleury was not great in 09. He was fine, but Smith is clearly better than MAF was in 09.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Not even close, at least not yet. Nor can you win a series on ratios or averages.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Not quite: I saw them all, and he's one rung below. He has potential to make the Top 5, and is the most impressive talent to emerge in this century, no doubt.

To answer the OP:

Apart from lack of time, one of the reasons I chose not to participate in the Top 100 projects is because I don't like the idea of ranking active players against retired players. Generally I think a proper comparative career evaluation can only be done post retirement to avoid the pitfalls around "current hype bias." It also gives us a better chance to move through a specific era into a new one, compare eras and take that into consideration. When Crosby came into the league, since the moment he stepped onto the ice there were people vaulting him ahead of Gretzky before he accomplished anything. The young pups on the main boards made arguments like "everybody who plays now is better than everybody who played in the past." A decade and a half later it's easier for people to see that we weren't in some golden age of hockey at that point, and that somebody like McDavid can come along and show more skill than Crosby, but still not measure up to Gretzky or Lemieux.

I want to see a couple of deep playoff runs and a larger point spread for a couple of more years clearly separating him from his peers before I'd comfortably consider him as a challenger for a Top 5 spot.

I saw them all too.

He's on their level, no doubt about it.

 

[bobholly39]

Re: competition. McDavid is playing against a line with two 100 point scorers and a Selke finalist which dominated ES goal differential more than anything seen since Gretzky's lines in the 80s Oilers. CGY was the 3rd best defensive team in the regular season. Dunno if there's any legitimate reason to devalue his opponents.

Not trying to devalue anyone per se - but Calgary has not done well in the playoffs with this core at all, ever. If you asked me going into these playoffs which "favorite" (based on standings) I had the least faith in, Calgary would have been tops by far. And - now they're underperforming.

So - it's just not very surprising to me.

Does that lessen McDavid's performance? I dunno - not saying it does or doesn't. It's very possible other great individual playoff runs had players playing some rounds against weak opponents/goalies, maybe even worst. But in the context of this season, I didn't expect much from Calgary, and they aren't doing well.

If McDavid makes it to round 3 and/or 4, any of St Louis, Colorado, Tampa or Carolina will be a monstrous opponent - and it'd be even more impressive to see him perform against those teams. Rangers are a good team too, but I probably don't slot them as high as the others.

 

[Rengorlex]

Not trying to devalue anyone per se - but Calgary has not done well in the playoffs with this core at all, ever. If you asked me going into these playoffs which "favorite" (based on standings) I had the least faith in, Calgary would have been tops by far. And - now they're underperforming.

So - it's just not very surprising to me.

Does that lessen McDavid's performance? I dunno - not saying it does or doesn't. It's very possible other great individual playoff runs had players playing some rounds against weak opponents/goalies, maybe even worst. But in the context of this season, I didn't expect much from Calgary, and they aren't doing well.

If McDavid makes it to round 3 and/or 4, any of St Louis, Colorado, Tampa or Carolina will be a monstrous opponent - and it'd be even more impressive to see him perform against those teams. Rangers are a good team too, but I probably don't slot them as high as the others.

It's definitely even more impressive if he does this against Colorado and Tampa Bay, but let's have some perspective. If he keeps scoring 2+ p/gp against those teams, it's far and ways the best playoff performance in decades and a strong contender for the best performance of all time.

 

[bobholly39]

It's definitely even more impressive if he does this against Colorado and Tampa Bay, but let's have some perspective. If he keeps scoring 2+ p/gp against those teams, it's far and ways the best playoff performance in decades and a strong contender for the best performance of all time.

I agree with this. 11 games in - I think he already has an argument for the greatest first 11 games of a playoff run of all-time. Not sure if it's #1, but it's in contention I'm sure.

You had previously implied Calgary and LA were strong opponents - I just don't really agree with that. But - it doesn't make his run any less impressive.

 

[JackSlater]

The thing I'm most interested in when it comes to McDavid is whether (or when) he figures out how to pick up the easy points with regularity. Despite how good his scoring is in these playoffs, what really stands out is the how often he makes a spectacular play to get the goal/assist. So to me he's still more like a 1989 Lemieux as opposed to a 1993 Lemieux who could still do the spectacular but was by that point smart enough to kill defences in subtle ways as well.

If McDavid figures out how to generate subtle offence regularly while still maintaining his explosiveness he'll be a monster.

 

[Mohar Ikram]

The thing I'm most interested in when it comes to McDavid is whether (or when) he figures out how to pick up the easy points with regularity. Despite how good his scoring is in these playoffs, what really stands out is the how often he makes a spectacular play to get the goal/assist. So to me he's still more like a 1989 Lemieux as opposed to a 1993 Lemieux who could still do the spectacular but was by that point smart enough to kill defences in subtle ways as well.

If McDavid figures out how to generate subtle offence regularly while still maintaining his explosiveness he'll be a monster.

I'm waiting for that too before I judged him. Is he still can produced when he lose his skating speed and have injury-ridden season? Can he be effiicient and only use what was needed to be more effective on offense?

Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Crosby and Messier has done that. Can he beat those 5 when his assets and advantage being ripped away? Only time will tell.

 

[sr edler]

Draisaitl's heating up and is outscoring McD so far in the Calgary series (13 vs 11 points), and has made some outstanding plays the last few games, so I would object to the notion that McD is singlehandedly powering Oils through the Flames.

If McD can singlehandedly go up against Calgary's 1st line and come out on top, then why are Draisaitl even on that line. Even Kane's been really good in the BoA. McD himself too, obviously.

In the Kings series though, sure, there you can make a case McD pretty much singlehandedly (Draisaitl looked injured and visibly off for most of the series despite 9 points) powered the Oils through, but that was against a fairly weak-ish 1st round opponent with a bunch of inexperienced D.

 

[bobholly39]

Not quite: I saw them all, and he's one rung below. He has potential to make the Top 5, and is the most impressive talent to emerge in this century, no doubt.

To answer the OP:

Apart from lack of time, one of the reasons I chose not to participate in the Top 100 projects is because I don't like the idea of ranking active players against retired players. Generally I think a proper comparative career evaluation can only be done post retirement to avoid the pitfalls around "current hype bias." It also gives us a better chance to move through a specific era into a new one, compare eras and take that into consideration. When Crosby came into the league, since the moment he stepped onto the ice there were people vaulting him ahead of Gretzky before he accomplished anything. The young pups on the main boards made arguments like "everybody who plays now is better than everybody who played in the past." A decade and a half later it's easier for people to see that we weren't in some golden age of hockey at that point, and that somebody like McDavid can come along and show more skill than Crosby, but still not measure up to Gretzky or Lemieux.

I want to see a couple of deep playoff runs and a larger point spread for a couple of more years clearly separating him from his peers before I'd comfortably consider him as a challenger for a Top 5 spot.

I agree with the bolded and think it's one of the most frustrating part of these projects. But the flipside is - it's also by far the least important/meaningful part, and so I don't let it bother me too much.

When we started the "top 200" project, ranking 101 to 200 - I argued McDavid should go first. Others disagreed and he was ranked 130th. Do I lose sleep over it? Well no, because we all know McDavid will end up a top 15 player of all-time easily (with a good chance of finishing close to #5), so it's not all that important how 4 or 5 seasons of his compare to full careers of others. What matters is how he'll rank in the end.

Sticking to active players - we also ranked Ovechkin and Crosby high in the top100 project recently. It's a bit easier/more relevant with those guys as they're already 30+ and most of their peak accomplishments are added up, so it gives a better view as to where they are/are headed for full career.

I've never felt McDavid was on the level of Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr and he probably isn't - but his regular season last year was spectacular (in very unique circumstances granted), and his current playoff start has to be in arguments for top first 11 games of a playoff run in history (maybe even #1). So - he might be getting closer than we think.

 

[Regal]

Re: competition. McDavid is playing against a line with two 100 point scorers and a Selke finalist which dominated ES goal differential more than anything seen since Gretzky's lines in the 80s Oilers. CGY was the 3rd best defensive team in the regular season. Dunno if there's any legitimate reason to devalue his opponents.

I don’t know about devaluing them necessarily, or knocking McDavid’s performance for it, as most great runs likely coincided somewhat with underperforming opponents, but they’re clearly not living up to their regular season in this series. It’s not just McDavid dominating a great team.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

CGY was the 3rd best defensive team in the regular season. Dunno if there's any legitimate reason to devalue his opponents.

agree with @Regal that i don't think anyone is devaluing mcdavid's performance, so much as acknowledging context in the present that we likely will lose in the future

but also, re: the quoted passage, how does the third best defensive team in the regular season, with a vezina finalist become... this? everyone scoffs, but chris tanev carried such a huge load for them defensively, and without him in the lineup, it all falls apart, esp on the road when you can't hide gudbranson. even having a hobbled tanev last night, they were so much better defensively.

i mean, how did the 2011 canucks go from the best defensive team in the regular season to giving up 21 goals in the last five games of the finals? dan hamhuis, because not only was he excellent defensively, but when he leaves the lineup you're playing bieksa without a safety net, edler and ehrhoff play too much, you're playing aaron rome top four minutes, andrew alberts enters the lineup.

that's the difference between these teams and someone like tampa. last year, if something happened to hedman, you'd have another legit #1 in mcdonough, and at the bottom of the lineup, you had a guy like david savard able to slide into the top four, and a decent enough luke schenn entering the lineup. or this year, cernak and serg are top pair quality guys playing second pair minutes. rutta, who played every game of last year's run, is not even getting into games.

 

[sr edler]

What a nutty BoA by Draisaitl, 17 points in 5 games. McDavid also good, with 12 points.

 

[Rengorlex]

Would Draisaitl crack the top 100 at this point? Probably better wait until the playoff run is complete. But what an absolute beast of a player.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

wow, that was a bonkers series by draisaitl

i guess there are two questions, one is should we start to make historical comparisons about draisaitl to the best runs of gretzky and mario, as per upthread with mcdavid?

the other one is, maybe one playoff series, also as per above, is maybe we can temper the "is it historical yet?" enthusiasm based on one scorching hot two weeks?

but north of three points/game in a series is just, wow. i'm just taking a cursory glance at the most points in a playoff series list and i think that's the points/game record over a full playoff series. afaict, the only other guy to hit three points/game is gretzky, who did it twice: 13 points/4 games, and 18 points/6 games.

 

[The Macho King]

I guess Battle of Alberta didn't update it's software from 1987. What a gong show.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I guess Battle of Alberta didn't update it's software from 1987. What a gong show.

the ghost of playoff vernon

 

[BNHL]

For 1 game,if I had to choose 10 players from history,I choose McDavid. He is toe to toe with the best of all time in talent right now,whether his career is long or short.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Would Draisaitl crack the top 100 at this point? Probably better wait until the playoff run is complete. But what an absolute beast of a player.

He should be close to it.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So what happens if

Oilers get swept by Avs, Mckinnon outplays and outscores both McDavid & Draisaitl.

Then Tampa beats Avs with Kucherov outscoring and outplaying McKinnon. And Vasilevskiy wins the Conn Smythe.

 

[jigglysquishy]

So what happens if

Oilers get swept by Avs, Mckinnon outplays and outscores both McDavid & Draisaitl.

Then Tampa beats Avs with Kucherov outscoring and outplaying McKinnon. And Vasilevskiy wins the Conn Smythe.

We do what we do every year.

Drink and debate Beliveau vs Harvey.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i am foreseeing a potvin/fedorov situation where kucherov leads his team in scoring again for the third straight year en route to a third straight cup, but the oilers make the finals so mcdavid wins the conn smythe because a billion points